Jason T. Greene wrote:
> Ovidiu Feodorov wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, Rémy
>>
>> The system I am talking about I delegates the build
tasks to ant,
>> feeding it with the appropriate dependency
information. In this
>> respect, your build can be as simple as
"ant", no need for maven
>> commands.
>
> Awesome. This is exactly how it should be. The whole
idea of limiting
> a project to 5 build commands is flawed. Using
"profiles" to solve
> this limitation is also flawed (and confusing).
>
> How does your system compare to Ivy (besides support
for native code
> integration)? Do you have any plans to support pulling
from maven2
> repos as a stop-gap?
From a dependency management perspective, Ivy and Fragma
are pretty
much the same thing, except obviously the fact that Fragma
supports
generically "attributed" artifacts, which is
essential for heterogeneous
development environments. Not JBoss' case, maybe with the
exception of
JBossWeb and its support for native connector code.
If you really interested in a point-to-point comparison, I
could add
that to the manual.
Fragma supports the concept of "generic
repository", so it will support
Maven repositories, if there's interest for it.
>
>> In order to implement this, the dependency manager
recursively walks
>> the dependency tree and detects the transitive
closure of your
>> project's dependencies, "flattens" the
dependency tree, and in its
>> current implementation, it just bails out with a
loud error message
>> when it detects a version conflict. It doesn't try
to "guess"
>> anything, even that heuristics can be optionally
plugged in (I am
>> personally afraid of heuristics, they have a habit
of yielding
>> unexpected results, so I won't encourage that)
>>
>> Here's the manual: htt
p://fragma.sourceforge.net/FragmaUserGuide.pdf
>
> Do you have any more information on how the Java
integration works (or
> is planned to work)? These sections are empty in the
manual.
The manual is outdated.
You mean "Ant" integration, not Java, right?
Java integration works, Fragma uses itself for dependency
management, so
it's got to work.
>
>> As I said before, my proposal is to use it to
configure a small
>> peripheral project, and if conclusions prove to be
positive, decide
>> what to do from there, in case you guys decide to
go this route.
>
> I have to say, I really like the idea of having a build
system that
> can be adjusted to fit our needs, as opposed to
changing our needs to
> fit the build system (maven).
I am up for it.
_______________________________________________
jboss-development mailing list
jboss-development lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-develop
ment
|