The way that the POMs for the apache ecosystem are structured, it
looks like I'm going to need to package several levels of "parent"
POMs. Something like:

apache-parent
genesis-parent
genesis-default-flava
genesis-java5-flava

Should each pom be separate, or is there a point at which it makes
sense to group some set of "apache-parent-poms" together? I can go
either way with it, but I want to put these up for review fairly soon,
and didn't want to file a bunch of separate reviews if they should all
just be bundled in a single package.

Thanks.

--Andy
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel

There's apparently precedent for bundling POMs:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2504

On 9/2/2011 2:01 PM, Andy Grimm wrote:
> The way that the POMs for the apache ecosystem are structured, it
> looks like I'm going to need to package several levels of "parent"
> POMs. Something like:
>
> apache-parent
> genesis-parent
> genesis-default-flava
> genesis-java5-flava
>
> Should each pom be separate, or is there a point at which it makes
> sense to group some set of "apache-parent-poms" together? I can go
> either way with it, but I want to put these up for review fairly soon,
> and didn't want to file a bunch of separate reviews if they should all
> just be bundled in a single package.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --Andy
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>
>

--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jack Tanner <ihok@hotmail.com> wrote:
> There's apparently precedent for bundling POMs:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2504

Yes there are precedents; in fact, I found (after starting this
thread) that the geronimo-parent-poms package in F16 contains POMs
related to genesis, but uses the 1.5 POMs rather than 2.0, so the
"flava" POMs aren't included. Could geronimo-parent-poms be updated
to 2.0 ?

And as for apache-parent, somehow even though org.apache:apache is
referenced as a parent in numerous fedora-packaged POMs on my system,
it's not packaged anywhere that I could see. I didn't think the child
POMs were functional without the parent, but I guess I have
misunderstood this. Still, it seems reasonable to have apache-parent
packaged.

--Andy

> On 9/2/2011 2:01 PM, Andy Grimm wrote:
>> The way that the POMs for the apache ecosystem are structured, it
>> looks like I'm going to need to package several levels of "parent"
>> POMs. *Something like:
>>
>> apache-parent
>> genesis-parent
>> genesis-default-flava
>> genesis-java5-flava
>>
>> Should each pom be separate, or is there a point at which it makes
>> sense to group some set of "apache-parent-poms" *together? *I can go
>> either way with it, but I want to put these up for review fairly soon,
>> and didn't want to file a bunch of separate reviews if they should all
>> just be bundled in a single package.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --Andy
>> --
>> java-devel mailing list
>> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>>
>>
>
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel

Excerpts from Andy Grimm's message of Fri Sep 02 20:42:49 +0200 2011:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jack Tanner <ihok@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > There's apparently precedent for bundling POMs:
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2504
>
> Yes there are precedents; in fact, I found (after starting this
> thread) that the geronimo-parent-poms package in F16 contains POMs
> related to genesis, but uses the 1.5 POMs rather than 2.0, so the
> "flava" POMs aren't included. Could geronimo-parent-poms be updated
> to 2.0 ?

So this doesn't get lost: file a bug in the bugzilla. I'll update it. I
assume you'd like to have this also in F16, correct?


> And as for apache-parent, somehow even though org.apache:apache is
> referenced as a parent in numerous fedora-packaged POMs on my system,
> it's not packaged anywhere that I could see. I didn't think the child
> POMs were functional without the parent, but I guess I have
> misunderstood this. Still, it seems reasonable to have apache-parent
> packaged.

You were correct in thinking that parent poms are required. We have it
in package maven2-common-poms. This is one ugly pom-only package that
used to contain 100s of POM files. We cut it down significantly, but
there are still things in there. If you create a new parent package,
that is currently contained in maven2-common-poms either file a bug to
have old POM removed or ping me on IRC and I'll do it.

> --Andy
>
> > On 9/2/2011 2:01 PM, Andy Grimm wrote:
> >> The way that the POMs for the apache ecosystem are structured, it
> >> looks like I'm going to need to package several levels of "parent"
> >> POMs. *Something like:
> >>
> >> apache-parent
> >> genesis-parent
> >> genesis-default-flava
> >> genesis-java5-flava
> >>
> >> Should each pom be separate, or is there a point at which it makes
> >> sense to group some set of "apache-parent-poms" *together? *I can go
> >> either way with it, but I want to put these up for review fairly soon,
> >> and didn't want to file a bunch of separate reviews if they should all
> >> just be bundled in a single package.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> --Andy
> >> --
> >> java-devel mailing list
> >> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > java-devel mailing list
> > java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
> >

--
Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@redhat.com>
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno

PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
<sochotnicky@redhat.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Andy Grimm's message of Fri Sep 02 20:42:49 +0200 2011:
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jack Tanner <ihok@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > There's apparently precedent for bundling POMs:
>> >
>> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2504
>>
>> Yes there are precedents; in fact, I found (after starting this
>> thread) that the geronimo-parent-poms package in F16 contains POMs
>> related to genesis, but uses the 1.5 POMs rather than 2.0, so the
>> "flava" POMs aren't included. *Could geronimo-parent-poms be updated
>> to 2.0 ?
>
> So this doesn't get lost: file a bug in the bugzilla. I'll update it. I
> assume you'd like to have this also in F16, correct?

Yes. I have filed this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736161

>
>> And as for apache-parent, somehow even though org.apache:apache is
>> referenced as a parent in numerous fedora-packaged POMs on my system,
>> it's not packaged anywhere that I could see. *I didn't think the child
>> POMs were functional without the parent, but I guess I have
>> misunderstood this. *Still, it seems reasonable to have apache-parent
>> packaged.
>
> You were correct in thinking that parent poms are required. We have it
> in package maven2-common-poms. This is one ugly pom-only package that
> used to contain 100s of POM files. We cut it down significantly, but
> there are still things in there. If you create a new parent package,
> that is currently contained in maven2-common-poms either file a bug to
> have old POM removed or ping me on IRC and I'll do it.

I see, I just didn't find the right directory of POMs. I have created
apache-parent and filed a review request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736069

I noted in the review request that the old POM should be removed from
maven2-common-poms once this package is released.


>> --Andy
>>
>> > On 9/2/2011 2:01 PM, Andy Grimm wrote:
>> >> The way that the POMs for the apache ecosystem are structured, it
>> >> looks like I'm going to need to package several levels of "parent"
>> >> POMs. *Something like:
>> >>
>> >> apache-parent
>> >> genesis-parent
>> >> genesis-default-flava
>> >> genesis-java5-flava
>> >>
>> >> Should each pom be separate, or is there a point at which it makes
>> >> sense to group some set of "apache-parent-poms" *together? *I can go
>> >> either way with it, but I want to put these up for review fairly soon,
>> >> and didn't want to file a bunch of separate reviews if they should all
>> >> just be bundled in a single package.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> --Andy
>> >> --
>> >> java-devel mailing list
>> >> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > java-devel mailing list
>> > java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>> >
>
> --
> Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@redhat.com>
> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno
>
> PGP: 7B087241
> Red Hat Inc. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * http://cz.redhat.com
>
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel