Posted by
Sven Gothel on
Oct 24, 2011; 2:20pm
URL: https://forum.jogamp.org/Problem-with-GLProfile-and-jogl2-rc2-tp3447491p3448279.html
On Monday, October 24, 2011 03:52:42 PM reyman [via jogamp] wrote:
For 'just' using JOGL via maven/pom-file, IMHO we just need:
- generate this pom file for each deployment on jogamp (fixed URLs), which will
- simple referencing the pure-java and native-lib JARs for download and use
We can add this pom-file generation in our deployment script (if it technically works this way).
If you provide a good boilerplate for let's say jogamp-next's URL,
I can drop it in our scripting.
You could prep the maven dependencies according to our 'os_and_arch' naming convention,
so they result in the same native JAR files/URLs.
Then we may offer pom URLs as we offer our versions as described here
http://forum.jogamp.org/New-Deployment-FHS-Filesystem-Hierarchy-Standard-td3334675.htmlfor example:
http://jogamp.org/deployment/jogamp-current/ http://jogamp.org/deployment/jogamp-next/ http://jogamp.org/deployment/v2.0-rc3/If you can provide a 'pom dependency family' for the base URL:
http://jogamp.org/deployment/archive/master/gluegen_424-joal_228-jogl_526-jocl_455/ (due to it's native jar file utilization)
I could continue maintaining it from there w/ your help / validation.
> But there is another solution, imho more complicated. We get the build.xml
> from jogl / gluegen and rewrite it from scratch for maven. I download the
> jogl sources to see, and it seems this is a lot of work for one personn :s
I am not a maven expert, but IMHO it's should be possible to kick off
an ant-based build.
However, I would not like to introduce _and_ maintain another build system.
Indeed this is not just a huge effort, but also contraproductive IMHO,
unless we switch over to a maven/pom build system completly.
The latter is currently really not within our plan,
so if anybody does it .. she should do it for *all* jogamp modules
and proove it's great and working properly.
~Sven