Grouper Developers Forum

["Michael R. Gettes" <>]

I agree with KH.  Following MO's line of thinking essentially says
"things shall never change".  I can't subscribe to such lines
of thinking.

/mrg

On Aug 6, 2008, at 17:32, Kathryn Huxtable wrote:

> Well, Shibboleth has been mavenized. That's part of the suite of  
> tools provided by Internet2.
>
> I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree with the  
> weight you give to that kind of consistency.
>
> -K
>
> On Aug 6, 2008, at 3:01 PM, Mike Olive wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, I had to drop off the call before providing
> > feedback regarding the use of Maven. I believe that one of
> > the most important things to consider when deciding upon
> > infrastructure related changes is its impact the user. In
> > this specific instance, I believe it is important to provide a
> > consistent experience to the user for building and installing
> > our set of I2 Middleware products and so believe that the
> > Ant version of Ldappc be kept up-to-date as the default project.
> >
> > --
> > MO
> >
> >
> > < -----Original Message-----
> > < From: Kathryn Huxtable 
> > [mailto:]
> > < Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:47 AM
> > < To: 
> >
> >  Dev; 
> >
> > < Subject: [signet-dev] Re: Ldappc has been mavenized, need advice
> > <
> > < Another relevant question is, do we keep it mavenized at all? Tom
> > < suggests we discuss this in the call tomorrow.
> > <
> > < It'd be nice if some of you would try it out, to at least
> > < download the
> > < binary and source snapshots and look at what gets produced. Take a
> > < look at the site documentation as well.
> > <
> > < I have a new version-free ldappc wiki page at
> > <
> > <    https://wiki.internet2.edu/confluence/display/i2miCommon/Ldappc
> > <
> > < It links to a downloads page at
> > <
> > <    
> > < https://wiki.internet2.edu/confluence/display/i2miCommon/Ldapp
> > < c+Software+Download
> > <
> > < There are links on the downloads page to the various distros
> > < including
> > < the 1.2.0 snapshot releases and a link to the browsable  
> > documentation.
> > <
> > < Or you can go directly to the browsable documentation at
> > <
> > <    http://www.kathrynhuxtable.org/projects/site/ldappc/
> > <
> > < -K
> > <
> > < On Aug 4, 2008, at 1:11 PM, Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
> > <
> > < > I have a 1.2.0 version almost ready to go. I'm working on some
> > < > sample configuration files and then I'm done.
> > < >
> > < > The new version supports Signet 1.3.0, but more importantly  
> > from a
> > < > developer's position, it has switched from using ant to
> > < maven as the
> > < > build tool.
> > < >
> > < > This involved moving the source from src/java to src/main/java  
> > and
> > < > src/test/java.
> > < >
> > < > Because I didn't want to lose version data for the files, which I
> > < > moved with no changes, I started with a clean copy of the
> > < project in
> > < > a separate CVS project called ldappc-mvn and then hand-moved the
> > < > files around on the CVS server.
> > < >
> > < > The big question is, what to do now.
> > < >
> > < > 1) I can attempt to merge these files back into the ldappc  
> > project
> > < > and delete the existing files so that they're in the Attic,
> > < but I'll
> > < > still have the tags for the files in their new locations,
> > < so I don't
> > < > think this is a good idea.
> > < >
> > < > 2) I can leave everything the way it is.
> > < >
> > < > 3) My preference is to rename the ldappc project to ldappc-old or
> > < > ldappc-legacy or something like that and rename the ldappc-mvn
> > < > project to ldappc. We would update references in the wiki so that
> > < > people wanting to check out the old code could do so.
> > < >
> > < > Of course if we had been using subversion you can rename
> > < directories
> > < > and move files without losing version information...
> > < >
> > < > Do people have suggestions as to what I should do?
> > < >
> > < > As I said, my preference is (3) and use "maven-old" for the
> > < name for
> > < > the old project.
> > < >
> > < > -K
> > <
> > <