5 messages in com.canoo.lists.webtestRe: [Webtest] Re: A pom for WebTest| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Denis N. Antonioli | 10 Mar 2006 01:13 | |
| Marc Guillemot | 10 Mar 2006 01:38 | |
| Denis N. Antonioli | 10 Mar 2006 02:09 | |
| Denis N. Antonioli | 13 Mar 2006 14:37 | |
| Dierk Koenig | 14 Mar 2006 01:28 |
| Subject: | Re: [Webtest] Re: A pom for WebTest |
|---|---|
| From: | Denis N. Antonioli (deni...@canoo.com) |
| Date: | 03/10/2006 02:09:42 AM |
| List: | com.canoo.lists.webtest |
On 10 mars 06, at 10:38, Marc Guillemot wrote:
... I think this is a promising development for webtest, but I'd like to get your opinion, because I also see some negative impacts:
I find it really great too
1) lib/ doesn't contain the dependencies anymore, which are now 'somewhere' in ~/.m2. -> How to setup our ide then?
with maven 1 you can use for instance:
maven eclipse:generate-classpath
I guess that it still exists for maven 2 and that analogous goals are available for other IDEs. In this case I see a pom as a positive impact, not as a negative one.
2) the lib/ that is put together for distribution will most probably be flat. The information that we encode now in the directory structure of lib (e.g. plugin/ vs optional/,...) woud have to be reconstructed from the pom(s), or ignored.
current content of lib/build should not appear in the distribution. For the rest I don't see big advantages to this structure. We can build group of dependencies int the POM if we choose to build different distributions with or without "plugins".
Agreed. I was even thinking of having different poms, but I will be more than happy with a single pom, without distinction, to start with.
3) I don't see yet how to reproduce the concept of plugin. Should we keep it? Should there be a pom for each plugin?
does someone use this structure to skip some tasks / jar? I guess that more than 99% of the webtest users just load all tasks / jars provided with webtest.
So, what do you think? Is it a path worth taking? Should we move (most of) our dependencies from our lib/ to the pom?
I think we should. For what does your "most of" apply? htmlunit snapshots? In this case it could make sense to build a kind of custom repository in which we can put the snapshots.
For one, I want to keep the webtest repository self-contained, so that we can further do: cvs co ... cd ... bin/webtest full
so at least (a part of) lib/runtime/ will have to stay.
And then, I just want to keep the door open, just in case... Maybe a licensing issue could stop us, maybe there would be too much work?
dna
-- If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution. -- Robert Sewell