[jbosstools-dev] [m2e-wtp-dev] [m2e-dev] Breaking changes to the archetype API -> m2e 2.0?

[Fred Bricon]

Greg,

only internal m2e classes have been modified, but the archetype runtime
doesn't expose the same Maven classes anymore
(org.apache.maven.archetype.Archetype -> ArchetypeManager) so... it might
not even apply for a major version bump after all. that's debatable I guess.

Here's the extent of the changes, so far :
https://github.com/eclipse/m2e-core/compare/master...fbricon:archetyper-2.x?expand=1

If we can keep on with 1.6 with these changes, fine by me :-)

The downside of moving to 2.0 is a lot of m2e extensions would probably
need to be rebuilt if they use version ranges like [1.0, 2.0). That's
impacts definitely more adopters than the handful that depends on the
archetype API.


On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:02 PM, Greg Amerson <gregory.amerson at liferay.com>
wrote:

> Hey Fred,
>
> Just want to clarify some of the APIs that may be changing.  In our
> adopter product we have code that looks like this:
>
> final ArchetypeManager archetypeManager =
> MavenPluginActivator.getDefault().getArchetypeManager();
> final ArtifactRepository remoteArchetypeRepository =
> archetypeManager.getArchetypeRepository( archetype );
> ...
> final List<IProject> newProjects =
>             projectConfigurationManager.createArchetypeProjects(
>                 location, archetype, groupId, artifactId, version,
> javaPackage, properties, configuration, monitor );
>
>
> I'm assuming you mean some of these APIs will change in incompatible ways
> in the proposed m2e 2.0?  Well I guess ArchetypeManager was always marked
> internal, so its fair game to be changed even if m2e doesn't go to 2.0. But
> the IProjectConfigurationManager was "API", so is that one of the
> interfaces that will undergo breaking change in 2.0?
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl <jason at takari.io> wrote:
>
>> Is there any downside at all to upgrading? If you've done the work and
>> fixed all those issues I'm super happy you've moved us forward.
>>
>> Honestly I doubt anyone has tied into the guts of Archetype aside from
>> you and really I think it's a small price to pay if the odd party is.
>> You've updated the code and I assume made it easier to deal with so I only
>> see upside.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Mar 18, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Fred Bricon <fbricon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have an initial POC that uses maven-archetype-plugin 2.3, instead of
>> the 2.0.alpha4 version (which was released in the 17th century, give or
>> take).
>> >
>> > I checked it fixes the following issues :
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/459453,
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/424010,
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/394918,
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/374660,
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/405945 (on OSX at least),
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/415114,
>> > - https://bugs.eclipse.org/429287
>> >
>> > Bugs https://bugs.eclipse.org/446657, https://bugs.eclipse.org/348893
>> may or not be fixed (I can't test proxies)
>> >
>> > Most of these issues were automatically closed already after 1 year of
>> inactivity. Doesn't mean the bugs are not there. My level of annoyance just
>> reached a point where I'd like to take action now.
>> >
>> > The only problem with the archetype update is it will break 3rd party
>> adopters (JBoss Tools at least) depending on the archetype API
>> (package/class names changed between 2.0.alpha4 and 2.3). I don't plan on
>> introducing a compatibility layer, not worth the hassle IMHO.
>> > Given that I'm also in charge of the JBoss Tools integration, I'm fine
>> with the impact :-)
>> >
>> > Getting the fix in will require m2e to bump its version to 2.0 (and
>> open a bunch of CQs  in ipzilla)
>> >
>> > I'd really like to get that change in for Eclipse Mars, if possible. Is
>> it too late from a release plan standpoint (i.e. 1.6 -> 2.0)? PMC, fellow
>> m2e committers wdyt?
>> >
>> > Fred
>> >
>> > --
>> > "Have you tried turning it off and on again" - The IT Crowd
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > m2e-dev mailing list
>> > m2e-dev at eclipse.org
>> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-dev
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder, Takari and Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> http://twitter.com/takari_io
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> First, the taking in of scattered particulars under one Idea,
>> so that everyone understands what is being talked about ... Second,
>> the separation of the Idea into parts, by dividing it at the joints,
>> as nature directs, not breaking any limb in half as a bad carver might.
>>
>>   -- Plato, Phaedrus (Notes on the Synthesis of Form by C. Alexander)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m2e-dev mailing list
>> m2e-dev at eclipse.org
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Greg Amerson
> Liferay Developer Tools
> Liferay, Inc. www.liferay.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> m2e-wtp-dev mailing list
> m2e-wtp-dev at eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-wtp-dev
>



-- 
"Have you tried turning it off and on again" - The IT Crowd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20150318/bb77dd10/attachment-0001.html