-
1. Re: [forge-dev] Roaster on Forge bom ?
Yes, that would be a good idea. Want to submit a pull-request?
Em 29/03/2014, às 14:27, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hi,
I was writing some samples with Roaster and I was wondering if it would make sense to have the Roaster artifacts defined in the Forge BOM ? As a developer it would make my life easier, but then I don't know if you want to tie Forge and Roaster now.
--
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Paris JUG | Devoxx France
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
-
2. Re: [forge-dev] Roaster on Forge bom ?
On second thought, I think this is not a good idea. You should depend on the parser-java addon and that is already in the BOM.
Em 29/03/2014, às 15:00, George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com> escreveu:
Yes, that would be a good idea. Want to submit a pull-request?
>> Em 29/03/2014, às 14:27, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was writing some samples with Roaster and I was wondering if it would make sense to have the Roaster artifacts defined in the Forge BOM ? As a developer it would make my life easier, but then I don't know if you want to tie Forge and Roaster now.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Antonio Goncalves
>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>
>> Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Paris JUG | Devoxx France
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
-
3. Re: [forge-dev] Roaster on Forge bom ?
Ok. When will java-parser be officially replaced by Roaster ? Forge 3 ?
2014-03-29 19:07 GMT+01:00 George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com>:
On second thought, I think this is not a good idea. You should depend on
the parser-java addon and that is already in the BOM.
Em 29/03/2014, às 15:00, George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com> escreveu:
Yes, that would be a good idea. Want to submit a pull-request?
Em 29/03/2014, às 14:27, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com>
escreveu:
Hi,
I was writing some samples with Roaster and I was wondering if it would
make sense to have the Roaster artifacts defined in the Forge BOM ? As a
developer it would make my life easier, but then I don't know if you want
to tie Forge and Roaster now.
>
--
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
| LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org/>
| Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> |
Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
| LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris
| Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
-
4. Re: [forge-dev] Roaster on Forge bom ?
Yes, that could happen in a major release change. In the meanwhile, they are happy living together in the parser-java addon
Em 30/03/2014, às 12:55, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com> escreveu:
Ok. When will java-parser be officially replaced by Roaster ? Forge 3 ?
2014-03-29 19:07 GMT+01:00 George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com>:
>> On second thought, I think this is not a good idea. You should depend on the parser-java addon and that is already in the BOM.
>>
>> Em 29/03/2014, às 15:00, George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com> escreveu:
>>
>>> Yes, that would be a good idea. Want to submit a pull-request?
>>>
>>>> Em 29/03/2014, às 14:27, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was writing some samples with Roaster and I was wondering if it would make sense to have the Roaster artifacts defined in the Forge BOM ? As a developer it would make my life easier, but then I don't know if you want to tie Forge and Roaster now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antonio Goncalves
>>>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>>>
>>>> Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Paris JUG | Devoxx France
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Paris JUG | Devoxx France
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
-
5. Re: [forge-dev] Roaster on Forge bom ?
Just FYI. Roaster is now in 2.4.1.Final as the default java parser. (The
only one included in parser-java)
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:31 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com>wrote:
Yes, that could happen in a major release change. In the meanwhile, they
are happy living together in the parser-java addon
Em 30/03/2014, às 12:55, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com>
escreveu:
Ok. When will java-parser be officially replaced by Roaster ? Forge 3 ?
>
2014-03-29 19:07 GMT+01:00 George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com>:
>> On second thought, I think this is not a good idea. You should depend on
>> the parser-java addon and that is already in the BOM.
>>
>> Em 29/03/2014, às 15:00, George Gastaldi <ggastald@redhat.com> escreveu:
>>
>> Yes, that would be a good idea. Want to submit a pull-request?
>>
>> Em 29/03/2014, às 14:27, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing@gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was writing some samples with Roaster and I was wondering if it would
>> make sense to have the Roaster artifacts defined in the Forge BOM ? As a
>> developer it would make my life easier, but then I don't know if you want
>> to tie Forge and Roaster now.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Antonio Goncalves
>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>
>> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
>> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org/>
>> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>
>
--
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
| LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org/>
| Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
"Simpler is better."