Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

[Kathryn Huxtable <>]

We certainly *do* have a decision. We're using ant.

But any decision can be revisited and I would propose that we study  
this over time and in the background. I wouldn't expect anything to  
happen for months.

And we still might decide to continue using ant.

I'm aware that Maven is not without its problems, but I consider the  
advantages to outweigh the disadvantages.

It took about three weeks of work to convert the IdMS system at KU,  
which consisted of about fifteen different projects, from ant to Maven.

-K, who also prefers subversion to CVS

On Apr 3, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Chris Hyzer wrote:
> My understanding of why we aren't using Maven is that it isn't a  
> silver bullet over ant (there are pros and cons), and we would  
> rather spend a few resources standardizing some build files /  
> tasks / dir structure than completely reimplementing a build tool  
> (which I would think would be a larger task).  When I google maven  
> vs ant it seems like not everyone prefers maven...  if we were  
> starting from scratch we might have a different direction, but we  
> already have an install base with ant.
>
> http://raibledesigns.com/rd/entry/maven_vs_ant
>
> Either way, I think we need to make a final decision and we can all  
> go in that direction for a while (I thought we had a decision the  
> last time we discussed it with the grouper team, but maybe not).
>
> Thanks!
> Chris
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kathryn Huxtable 
> > [mailto:]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 2:52 PM
> > To: Michael R. Gettes
> > Cc: GW Brown, Information Systems and Computing; Chris Hyzer; Grouper
> > Users; Signet Users
> > Subject: Re: [signet-users] Re: [grouper-users] ldappc build question
> >
> > We're not using Maven because I'm not an evangelist and haven't
> > seriously tried to push it.
> >
> > The Apache project uses it and we used it at KU for many projects,  
> > but
> > not for all. Identity Management used it, when that unit existed.
> >
> > There are people in I2 such as Chad LaJoie (for instance) who can't
> > stand Maven.
> >
> > Okay, I'm not an evangelist, but I'll put together something by the
> > time of the I2 meeting that I can share about the benefits of Maven
> > and also some of its less nice features.
> >
> > And to be fair to Chad, he hasn't looked at version 2, which is
> > considerably different from version 1.
> >
> > -K, a pragmatist, not an idealist
> >
> > On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:42 PM, Michael R. Gettes wrote:
> > > Okay, I'll bite - then why aren't we using Maven?  And should we
> > > not be using the same tools across all the projects?
> > >
> > > /mrg
> > >
> > > On Apr 3, 2008, at 13:06, Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
> > > > Neither do I. I like Maven. -K
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 3, 2008, at 2:54 AM, GW Brown, Information Systems and
> > > > Computing wrote:
> > > > > In general I don't like merging JARS. blair used to do this for
> > > > > the API but came up with a separate ant target, dist-lib, so the
> > > > > user could choose.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > > --On 03 April 2008 01:28 -0400 Chris Hyzer 
> > > > > <>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is a good point and I agree that common (or upgradeable)
> > > > > > jars inside
> > > > > > a jar are annoying (e.g. commons-lang, cglib).  However, for
> > > > > > grouper web
> > > > > > services, Axis has dozens of jars, many of which I don't think
> > > > > > anyone
> > > > > > would want to upgrade individually or care to look at.  So, the
> > > > > > common
> > > > > > (upgradeable) ones from axis are:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://viewvc.internet2.edu/viewvc.py/grouper-ws/grouper-
> > ws/lib/axis/?roo
> > > > > > t=I2MI
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have individually as jars (not bundled).  But the uncommon ones
> > > > > > (~40 of
> > > > > > them):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://viewvc.internet2.edu/viewvc.py/grouper-ws/grouper-
> > ws/lib/axis-bund
> > > > > > le/?root=I2MI
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have wrapped into one axisBundle.jar via ant.  When you say
> > > > > > "impossible", do you mean inconvenient, or do you mean  
> > > > > > impossible?
> > > > > > Because you can just open the bundled jar, delete the files in a
> > > > > > certain
> > > > > > package, and then put a newer version of the jar in the lib dir.
> > > > > > Yes,
> > > > > > this is inconvenient and perhaps a little risky, but you will
> > > > > > also notice
> > > > > > the size of i2mi-common.jar has shrunk in version 1.3 of
> > > > > > grouper... :).
> > > > > > Anyways, if someone sees a jar in the axis bundle that should be
> > > > > > removed,
> > > > > > this is easy let me know.  Or if consensus is people would rather
> > > > > > see 80
> > > > > > jars in grouper web services instead of 40, Im not tied to the
> > > > > > bundle
> > > > > > idea and can ditch it no problem...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think the bigger problem of the bundle is knowing what jars you
> > > > > > have.
> > > > > > If you think you need to add a new jar and it is already in the
> > > > > > bundle
> > > > > > that can be a problem.  So #1 is for people to know there is a
> > > > > > bundle,
> > > > > > and #2 is having a way to know what is in the bundle.  In  
> > > > > > grouper-
> > > > > > ws this
> > > > > > is stored in the above dir in CVS (of course tied to the branch
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > that you are using)...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > Chris
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Michael R. Gettes 
> > > > > > > [mailto:]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 2:14 PM
> > > > > > > To: Kathryn Huxtable
> > > > > > > Cc: Grouper Users; Signet Users
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [grouper-users] ldappc build question
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kathryn, as you know, I have long been frustrated by the
> > > > > > > "deployment design" of LDAPPC.  ANYTHING you can do to simplify
> > > > > > > it and have it actually make sense is a good thing!  But,  
> > > > > > > please,
> > > > > > > don't redo the mistake in grouper 120 (i think that was the
> > > > > > > version)
> > > > > > > where jars like subject-api got rolled into a larger jar file
> > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > it impossible to try different versions (or test versions) of
> > > > > > > various
> > > > > > > jar files as part of the development process for creating a
> > > > > > > service.
> > > > > > > I guess a shorter way of saying this might - please also retain
> > > > > > > the flexibility.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I hope this helps!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > /mrg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Apr 2, 2008, at 14:09, Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
> > > > > > > > Is there any interest in having the build process for ldappc
> > > > > > > > generate a jar, so that can easily be run from a simple
> > > > > > > directory
> > > > > > > > with the grouper-api, signet-api, and other assorted jars?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Currently, it just generates a class directory.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -K
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------------
> > > > > GW Brown, Information Systems and Computing