packaging apache parent poms

[Andy Grimm]

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

[Jack Tanner]

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(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>
>

[Andy Grimm]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jack Tanner <ihok(a)hotmail.com&gt; 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(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
> >
> >
>
>  --
>  java-devel mailing list
>  java-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>

[Stanislav Ochotnicky]

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(a)hotmail.com&gt;
> 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(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  > --
>  > java-devel mailing list
>  > java-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>  > 
-- 
Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky(a)redhat.com&gt;
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno

PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc.                               http://cz.redhat.com

[Andy Grimm]

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
<sochotnicky(a)redhat.com&gt; 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(a)hotmail.com&gt; 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(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > java-devel mailing list
> > > java-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
> > >
>
>  --
>  Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno
>
>  PGP: 7B087241
>  Red Hat Inc.                               http://cz.redhat.com
>
>  --
>  java-devel mailing list
>  java-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
>