Re: [gentoo-java] Maven from source - version 2.x or 3.x ?

[Kasun Gajasinghe <kasunbg@gmail.com>]

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 05/22/2011 05:54 PM, Eric Chatellier wrote:
>> Le 22/05/2011 07:38, Kasun Gajasinghe a écrit :
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'm working on getting Apache Maven in to work by building from
>>> source. Currently, in main tree, Maven is installed using the binary
>>> (dev-java/maven-bin), which is against the Gentoo Java Packaging
>>> Policy.
>>>
>>> Getting Maven in to work by building-from-source is a lengthy process.
>>> We have two main versions to go ahead. The 2.x range with the latest
>>> being v2.2.1, and the 3.x range with the latest being v3.0.3. The
>>> compatibility notes for 2.x and 3.x are at [1]. There's only few
>>> compatibility issues as I've seen. I was thinking to go with 2.x since
>>> in my experience and the area where I was involved in, haven't had any
>>> plans to migrate to Maven 3.x soon. But the overall picture may vary.
>>>
>>> So, I'm asking from the Gentoo's Java community, what's the suitable
>>> version to go with? 2.x or 3.x
>> Hi, i'm a gentoo user and java developper using maven for
>> years. I also known the maven gentoo problem ;)
>> So i'll be happy to help you or test your work.

Thanks Eric. Much appreciate your help. I'm starting out now, and my
objective first goal is to bump all the maven modules. As you probably
know, maven-from-source is implemented in java-overlay though it's not
in a working state. So, have to fix all the bugs in there! :)
I could possibly use help on knowing the issues the current
implementation have for now only if you like that kind of thing!


>>
>> For maven 2/3, 3.x is a new achitecture intended to
>> be maven 2 complaint. So, i vote for 3.x.
>> But maybe 3.x is too young...
>>

Thanks... let's see what others say. See my comment below.

>
> Eventually 2.x will die while 3.x continues to be supported and so on. I
> would target 3.x and then do 2.x also if it's relative easy to backport.
> If they are largely compatible as you say then targeting 3.x shouldn't
> be a problem knowledge wise.

True. As they say, the *major* objective of Maven 3 was to decouple
maven core from reporting tools (such as site plugin). So, yes, Maven
3.x is compatible with 2.x except for the site plugin and few other
plugins mentioned at [2]. We can back-port, but _most_ of the projects
still depend on 2.x because there isn't any major issue with 2.x
except for the slightly slower performance afaik. So, I was afraid
whether going ahead with 3.x makes the real projects can't use
maven-from-source thing effectively.

So, I was in the mind supporting 2.x and then upgrade to 3.x when the
time comes. Does the site-plugin is actually useful when packaging?
Only packagers will know. If that's not matter much, then I'm OK to go
with 3.x.

[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/MAVEN/maven-3x-plugin-compatibility-matrix.html

Thanks,
--Kasun

-- 
~~~*******'''''''''''''*******~~~
Kasun Gajasinghe,
University of Moratuwa,
Sri Lanka.
Blog: http://kasunbg.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kasunbg