On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:10:15 +1000, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep, and under gump there is a build.properties set up to hijack all the
versions :)
Remove build.properties under gump and you go back to having this behaviour.
We don't necessarily need gump to do nightly builds
Martin Cooper wrote:
A few quick comments:
1) Not all Commons components are set up for Maven builds, so the
just a matter of doesn't apply in all cases.
This is true, but all Commons projects are required to use Maven to
build the Project's Website. It benefits a Commons project to use Maven
1) Not all Commons components are set up for Maven builds, so the
just a matter of doesn't apply in all cases.
2) The Commons nightly builds are just one part of the wider Jakarta
nightly build, and certainly not all Jakarta projects use Maven, or
are likely to do so any time soon.
Yes, I
ISTR (but could be wrong) that a Gump instance can be configured to
use particular versions of particular packages, instead of building
latest and greatest every time. If so, it might be feasible to
simulate what I try to do, which is always base the nightly commons
builds on the latest released
down
to my lack of experience with the tool.
Cheers,
Rory
- Original Message -
From: Mark R. Diggory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [general] Do we need to support Ant based builds?
Again
. Diggory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [general] Do we need to support Ant based builds?
Again, its important that a Commons project support both ant and maven.
Use the project template directory
Hi,
If jakarta-commons and jakarta-commons-sandbox decide to abandon Ant
based builds, then you're going to need someone else to volunteer to
run the nightly builds. That may not be a bad thing on its own merits
(it should really be running on supported Apache hardware instead of
my Linux
Shapira, Yoav wrote:
Should we start a new discussion thread on getting commons projects
built nightly via Gump @brutus.apache.org?
I think this is the ideal solution.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Gump can do Maven builds now,
True.
Can and does - for a non-trivial example see
http://brutus.apache.org/gump/public/excalibur/excalibur-event-api/gump_work/build_excalibur_excalibur-event-api.html.
Stefan
C'mon, that one doesn't even run tests!
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:33:20 +0200, Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Gump can do Maven builds now,
True.
Can and does - for a non-trivial example see
For [collections] ant is still the 'preferred' build tool. The website is
done with maven, but no more. This seems to use maven for what its best at,
website production.
Stephen
- Original Message -
From: Eric Pugh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Commons-Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Dion Gillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C'mon, that one doesn't even run tests!
8-)
At least it has a bunch of dependencies, that's what non-trivial meant
in my mail.
, September 21, 2004 11:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [general] Do we need to support Ant based builds?
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Dion Gillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C'mon, that one doesn't even run tests!
8-)
At least it has a bunch of dependencies, that's what non-trivial meant
Johnson Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know why i can read all of yr communication email.
Our records show:
Sun Aug 17 09:39:26 2003 + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That means that on Sunday, August 17 at 9:39 PDT, that e-mail address
requested AND CONFIRMED that it wished to subscribe to our
Are we all sure that absolute paths are no longer inserted into Maven
generated build.xml files?
As long as your using the latest 1.0 release.
Unfortunately, there are still some cases (including [math]) where absolute
paths get inserted.
Are we all sure that absolute paths are no longer inserted into Maven
generated build.xml files?
As long as your using the latest 1.0 release.
Unfortunately, there are still some cases (including [math]) where absolute
paths get inserted.
-Phil
Sure subscribing now.
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:17:06 +0200, Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Dion Gillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C'mon, that one doesn't even run tests!
8-)
At least it has a bunch of dependencies, that's what non-trivial meant
in my
On the nightly stuff;
I think Gump can do Maven builds now, rather than the ant scripts, and
if not, I've got a (probably quite similar to Craig's) build system
set of scripts for Maven that we could use.
Hen
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 13:44:54 -0700, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 20
+1 to keeping Ant support. It is the de facto standard. And our own
dogfood. :-)
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I recommend maintain ant support. And for projects that are using Maven,
I highly recommend they generate default build.xml files using the maven
ant task. I also recommend that we not be dependent on anything for
automated builds that is not already in this generated build file (not
that you
20 matches
Mail list logo
