|
»
»
« Return to Thread: Is it possible to make pom.xml simpler?
Re: Is it possible to make pom.xml simpler?
by Brett Porter
::
Rate this Message:
Let's not start another attributes vs elements holy war :)
I have no problem with either, but the reasons I see not to change:
- we would have to support both. This may lead to confusion.
- currently it is very consistent - there are no attributes, lists are
always visible as lists, etc. The syntax is a lot more memorable,
even if it is more verbose.
I agree that requiring tools is a bad idea, but they certainly won't
hurt (even an XML editor + XSD will do the trick here). I think the
focus should be on removing repetition in the content, not the syntax.
That's just my view - others?
- Brett
On 12/15/05, Cservenak Tamas <cservenak@...> wrote:
> A very big +1 here!
>
> ~t~
>
> Milos Kleint wrote:
> > maybe there's just need for tools to help creating the pom content?
> >
> > Milos
> >
> > Chris Berry wrote:
> >> Hi Matt!
> >> A big +1 from me. I've been discussing this w/ John, Jason, et al. A
> >> push
> >> towards simplifying/shortening the XML would be a big help.
> >> Cheers,
> >> -- Chris
> >>
> >> On 12/15/05, John Casey <jdcasey1779@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Actually, an even better thing to do would be to participate in the
> >>> design for 2.1. The page for some of this discussion is at:
> >>>
> >>> http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=32108
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>> Allan Ramirez wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Please file a jira issue for this http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG
> >>>>
> >>>> -allan
> >>>>
> >>>> Matt Raible wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> After seeing what the Spring Developers have done to simplify Spring
> >>>>> context files, I can't help but think the same thing is possible for
> >>>>> Maven 2's pom.xml. Is it possible to add namespaces and make
> >>>>> something like the following possible?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Before:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependency>
> >>>>> <groupId>springframework</groupId>
> >>>>> <artifactId>spring</artifactId>
> >>>>> <version>1.2.6</version>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dep:artifact name="org/springframework/spring" version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Or just allow attributes to make things a bit cleaner?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="org.springframework" artifactId="spring"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Allowing 1 line instead of 5-6 lines per dependency would allow me to
> >>>>> cut my dependencies listing from 140 lines of XML to 37 lines. When
> >>>>> the Spring guys allows a couple of elements as attributes (<ref> and
> >>>>> <value>) - it made writing Spring context files *much* easier.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's an example of my simplified version:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependencies>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="cargo" artifactId="cargo" version="0.6"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="commons-lang" artifactId="commons-lang"
> >>>>> version="2.0"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="commons-logging" artifactId="commons-logging"
> >>>>> version="1.0.4"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="displaytag" artifactId="displaytag"
> >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="xalan" groupId="xalan"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="uk.ltd.getahead" artifactId="dwr"
> >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="org.hibernate" artifactId="hibernate"
> >>>>> version="3.0.5">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="jta" groupId="javax.transaction"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="geronimo-spec" artifactId="geronimo-spec-jta"
> >>>>> version="1.0.1B-rc4"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="jmock" artifactId="jmock" version="1.0.1"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="junit" artifactId="junit" version="3.8.1"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="jwebunit" artifactId="jwebunit" version="1.2"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="httpunit" artifactId="httpunit" version="1.6"
> >>>>> scope="test">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="js" groupId="rhino"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="log4j" artifactId="log4j" version="1.2.11"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="postgresql" artifactId="postgresql"
> >>>>> version="8.1-404.jdbc3"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" artifactId="servlet-api"
> >>>>> version="2.4" scope="provided"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" artifactId="jstl"
> >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="taglibs" artifactId="standard"
> >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="opensymphony" artifactId="sitemesh"
> >>>>> version="2.2.1" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springmodules"
> >>>>> artifactId="springmodules-validator" version="0.1" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springframework" artifactId="spring"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springframework" artifactId="spring-mock"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6" scope="test">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="spring-jdbc"
> >>>>> groupId="springframework"/>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="spring-web" groupId="springframework"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> </dependencies>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course, Ivy's syntax is even simpler, so maybe that'll provide
> >>>>> some
> >>>>> motivation. ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependencies>
> >>>>> <dependency org="apache" name="commons-lang" rev="2.0" />
> >>>>> <dependency org="apache" name="commons-cli" rev="1.0" />
> >>>>> </dependencies>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
I have no problem with either, but the reasons I see not to change:
- we would have to support both. This may lead to confusion.
- currently it is very consistent - there are no attributes, lists are
always visible as lists, etc. The syntax is a lot more memorable,
even if it is more verbose.
I agree that requiring tools is a bad idea, but they certainly won't
hurt (even an XML editor + XSD will do the trick here). I think the
focus should be on removing repetition in the content, not the syntax.
That's just my view - others?
- Brett
On 12/15/05, Cservenak Tamas <cservenak@...> wrote:
> A very big +1 here!
>
> ~t~
>
> Milos Kleint wrote:
> > maybe there's just need for tools to help creating the pom content?
> >
> > Milos
> >
> > Chris Berry wrote:
> >> Hi Matt!
> >> A big +1 from me. I've been discussing this w/ John, Jason, et al. A
> >> push
> >> towards simplifying/shortening the XML would be a big help.
> >> Cheers,
> >> -- Chris
> >>
> >> On 12/15/05, John Casey <jdcasey1779@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Actually, an even better thing to do would be to participate in the
> >>> design for 2.1. The page for some of this discussion is at:
> >>>
> >>> http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=32108
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>> Allan Ramirez wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Please file a jira issue for this http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG
> >>>>
> >>>> -allan
> >>>>
> >>>> Matt Raible wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> After seeing what the Spring Developers have done to simplify Spring
> >>>>> context files, I can't help but think the same thing is possible for
> >>>>> Maven 2's pom.xml. Is it possible to add namespaces and make
> >>>>> something like the following possible?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Before:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependency>
> >>>>> <groupId>springframework</groupId>
> >>>>> <artifactId>spring</artifactId>
> >>>>> <version>1.2.6</version>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dep:artifact name="org/springframework/spring" version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Or just allow attributes to make things a bit cleaner?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="org.springframework" artifactId="spring"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Allowing 1 line instead of 5-6 lines per dependency would allow me to
> >>>>> cut my dependencies listing from 140 lines of XML to 37 lines. When
> >>>>> the Spring guys allows a couple of elements as attributes (<ref> and
> >>>>> <value>) - it made writing Spring context files *much* easier.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's an example of my simplified version:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependencies>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="cargo" artifactId="cargo" version="0.6"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="commons-lang" artifactId="commons-lang"
> >>>>> version="2.0"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="commons-logging" artifactId="commons-logging"
> >>>>> version="1.0.4"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="displaytag" artifactId="displaytag"
> >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="xalan" groupId="xalan"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="uk.ltd.getahead" artifactId="dwr"
> >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="org.hibernate" artifactId="hibernate"
> >>>>> version="3.0.5">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="jta" groupId="javax.transaction"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="geronimo-spec" artifactId="geronimo-spec-jta"
> >>>>> version="1.0.1B-rc4"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="jmock" artifactId="jmock" version="1.0.1"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="junit" artifactId="junit" version="3.8.1"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="jwebunit" artifactId="jwebunit" version="1.2"
> >>>>> scope="test"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="httpunit" artifactId="httpunit" version="1.6"
> >>>>> scope="test">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="js" groupId="rhino"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="log4j" artifactId="log4j" version="1.2.11"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="postgresql" artifactId="postgresql"
> >>>>> version="8.1-404.jdbc3"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" artifactId="servlet-api"
> >>>>> version="2.4" scope="provided"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" artifactId="jstl"
> >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="taglibs" artifactId="standard"
> >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="opensymphony" artifactId="sitemesh"
> >>>>> version="2.2.1" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springmodules"
> >>>>> artifactId="springmodules-validator" version="0.1" scope="runtime"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springframework" artifactId="spring"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> >>>>> <dependency groupId="springframework" artifactId="spring-mock"
> >>>>> version="1.2.6" scope="test">
> >>>>> <exclusions>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="spring-jdbc"
> >>>>> groupId="springframework"/>
> >>>>> <exclusion artifactId="spring-web" groupId="springframework"/>
> >>>>> </exclusions>
> >>>>> </dependency>
> >>>>> </dependencies>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course, Ivy's syntax is even simpler, so maybe that'll provide
> >>>>> some
> >>>>> motivation. ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <dependencies>
> >>>>> <dependency org="apache" name="commons-lang" rev="2.0" />
> >>>>> <dependency org="apache" name="commons-cli" rev="1.0" />
> >>>>> </dependencies>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
« Return to Thread: Is it possible to make pom.xml simpler?
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
