Sorry about this, but I have to admit that this seems to be the right move.
Even though the idea of this project is pretty good, there is some
development missind :-(
Lets hear what the guys/girls from ant are saying.
+1 for Nics idea.
R,
Markus
Five days have passed, and the only reply
Hmm, this was the testing stuff I was working on currently. Sorry for the
delay :-(
I do prefer the creation of the testing objects in the test class. And I
definitly agree on your statement in the first mail :-)
Greetz
Markus
Ok, I see that viewcvs can help me find old code. I can go borrow
Once again.
I think I was a little hasty to check this stuff in, without checking once
again, if this stuff is used anyhow. Right now, I still have an open issue
with the artifacttest class, I hope I can resolve tonight.
Basically what I did, is, that I totally recovered/resurrected the version
Hello,
from what I have seen basically nothing. You did some stuff in other
classes.
Markus
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
Basically what I did, is, that I totally recovered/resurrected the
version
before the deletion of UpdaterConfig.
Huh? Oh no! I did a tonne of work yesterday. How much of that is
You are right, you touched the DownloaderTool. But I believe that I did
not checkin any version of DownloaderTool, where functional changes are
done. Take a look at the class. It should work.
But ...
Markus
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
Markus wrote:
from what I have seen basically nothing. You did
No Problem. It made me nervous as well. We checked in pretty much the
same time :-)
Anyway, I looked through the code I changed, and it does not look like
there are any functional changes.
Markus
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
You are right, you touched the DownloaderTool. But I believe that I did
Sorry, a little to hasty. rebuild the stuff. right now i still have the
artifacttest where some work has to be done.
to recover (resurrect) a deleted file, you have to find out the old
revision number and copy it (svn copy) to the working copy. then just
add it once again. pretty straight
Hmm, sorry about this one. got the sources not committed :-(
Right now, I cannot commit them, because they are on my machine at home.
Sorry
Markus
This compile?
/**
* Provides a clone of this object
*/
public Object clone() {
ArtifactInstance aInstance = new
+1 for removal of everything unused and not needed right now. after we
have cleared the API we could add this once again. there is still svn
which takes care about backups :-)
Nick Chalko wrote:
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
like I said already, I am browsing through the API and adding JavaDoc to
some
Hmm, well.
what do you think should be our next steps? I am not a big writer, so i am
not really a big fan of writing documentation :-)
also the security stuff is nice, but i guess that there are other issues
scratching right now, right?
Hello,
since my project at work is pretty much live
Hello,
+1 from me. Was not intent to start a flame war.
R,
Markus
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
Lets not start a flame war, discussion here is how to get groups
working together and find commonality in code and repository
architecture etc, there are individuals who use and
--- snip ---
I am getting (finally) closer to being able hack this code agian. My
thinking is we associate MD5 checksum files URLs with files URLs (as
attributes), and when we decide to download one we (1) copy to an unsafe
place (2) check the checksum against that one (3) move if ok (4) fail
Hello,
Nick just said that it is a short term goal, that the MD5 stuff is working.
Well, basically it should work, and the test cases are there. But as already
discussed on this list, it can be necessary to use external tools (like
md5sum on linux) to generate the md5 hash. I have right now really
Hello,
since Depot is a repository Updater we should try to introduce the
repository already in the build-files of update? What do you think? How
can we do this?
Markus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: nickchalko
Date: Tue Apr 27 09:22:34 2004
New Revision: 10313
Modified:
I fixed this for the antlet version.
Shall we move to that so we only have to keep one build.xml up to date.
+1 from me, even though this is pretty new technology and not really
apache.org either :-)
Shurly think so! How can we help here?
R,
Markus
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
I understand. But it has to be fairly mature before one can
deploy and recommend using it to the PMCs. Also, you can't
force all the projects to use it. For this you need some way
Sorry for this one. Should have seen this on my machine :-)
Somehow this file got transfered into another one.
R,
Markus
Adam Jack wrote:
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For help understanding the request please visit
Hello,
I just browsed a little around and found some special solutions for the
checksum stuff with MD5-Hashes. ANT has already a nice task for this, which I
did
not knew. Anyway, what do you think, should we use this? This means
basically a tight integration with ant.
Any comments on this one?
+1
R,
Markus
I think we really should start to publish a site about Depot, as both
Ant and Forrest are now investigating the use of Ruper, and because we
need visibility in any case.
I propose that we create a www directory and publish the docs there.
Then a cron job can get the
Hmm, looks good. Even though, I just wanted to check in my build.xml-file.
It looks a little bigger and I did what you described (copied the javac-tags
with only slight modifications). Anyway, I would definitly like to check this
in tonite.
I am not using ANT 1.6 though, this means, that I cannot
Hello,
Nick already state, that we should first get the build stuff up and running
before we are going to make any changes and add complexity. I totally agree
with this. I have at my system already put the vfs and also the version stuff
into the /lib-directory, therefor we can use this right now
21 matches
Mail list logo
