Hi Paul.

Couple of things.... I've found that git's 'mv' tracking is somewhat problematic, it's not as easy to track an item's history than before the move.... you have to specify --follow for the 'git log' request.

Neither eclipse nor github appear to apply the --follow logic to the moved files' history... It would be nicer if they did, since all the classes have moved once already (jdom -> jdom2).

I acknowledge that the current system of dumping the supporting jars in the repo is 'crude', but, it has some other advantages. Having everyone using the same jar versions for the JDOM2 development would reduce the number of 'head-scratching' problems. This is up for discussion, but it seems that eliminating inconsistencies at this point in the development would be useful.

Finally, I am in the habit of using ant and eclipse (call me 'old fashioned'), and I have the habit of throwing in an 'eclipse' target for ant build.xml files. I have added this target to the jdom build file.

Running 'ant eclipse' and refreshing your eclipse project (f5) will set up/update your eclipse source folders, and library dependencies in a way that makes it all 'just work'.

I normally have a 'smarter' eclipse target that uses the ant classpath to set up eclipse, but, in this case, I have it hard-coded at the moment. I see that it's missing the xml-apis.jar file, so it needs an update anyway. I'll make it dynamic based on the ant compile classpath instead.

Obviously the demand for 'Mavenization' is growing... perhaps the most important question is 'how important' is it? I have always worked in an environment where build dependencies are more tightly controlled than what maven would allow, and the dependency-loading nature of maven would be 'wrong'.

If you can make a convincing argument to 'Mavenize' then the actual commit process would have to be very tightly coordinated, and it would interrupt the actual JDOM2 coding as things stabilize. Further, it would also benefit from having the comprehensive unit testing in order to confirm that nothing has broken in 'the wash'.

As for a full Maven re-structure, I am hesitant... and I think Jason will have to weigh in with the final word on that. It's more far-reaching than just JDOM2...

On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 15:25:31 +0200, Paul Libbrecht <pa...@hoplahup.net> wrote: