I think pointing at the release branch would be the most stable way to handle this. that way bug fixes become part of the horn build.
Something like this: horn -install:castle (build from branches) horn -install:castle-trunk (build from trunks) -rb From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Cowan Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 3:09 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: AutomaticTransactionManagement >> No probs, I'm happy to help :) >> Should the descriptor be maintained by the project owners I think that would be amazing if you guys could help with the descriptor updates. Cheers Paul Cowan Cutting-Edge Solutions (Scotland) http://thesoftwaresimpleton.blogspot.com/ 2009/12/20 John Simons <[email protected]> Inline On Dec 20, 9:37 pm, Paul Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the reply. > > I hope I don't come across as expecting you guys to "fix" your build in > order to make horn work. I am only trying to work out what the best way to > approach the new landscape is. No probs, I'm happy to help :) Should the descriptor be maintained by the project owners? > > Also a big thanks to Mauricio for helping with the descriptors. > > Is it safe to assume there is a stable versioned build and a trunk build for > all castle projects? Yes, the tagged versions are the stable released versions. > > Does the trunk CI server build not copy across the binaries into the > relevant build folders? No it doesn't, there is no automation of this. it is up to each project leader to update their dependencies if they do feel the need for it, it could be that the project does not require the latest of any dependency. That said I think we will try our best to keep all the projects in sync. > > If there is a stable versioned build then I can update the descriptors to > that I guess although I might need some guidance with this. > > Is there a versioned branch for each castle project. Yes > > The reason I personally started horn was to be able to easily get the latest > version easily but there is probably less chance of getting a successful > build now the trunk has been split. > > A split which I fully support for what it is worth. > > Cheers > > Paul Cowan > > Cutting-Edge Solutions (Scotland) > > http://thesoftwaresimpleton.blogspot.com/ > > 2009/12/19 John Simons <[email protected]> > > > Hi Paul, > > > Yes it is indeed an error. > > At the moment the trunk versions are not compatible, we discussed this > > here: > >http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thr... > > > I'm sorry that I haven't comment on this thread > > >http://www.google.com/url?sa=D <http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://groups.google.com/group/horn-.> &q=http://groups.google.com/group/horn-... > > > This is going to be an ongoing problem for horn because you guys are > > trying to build against all the trunks. > > I vote to fix the dependency versions on the descriptors. > > > Cheers > > John > > > On Dec 20, 3:39 am, dagda1 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Is the trunk castle facilities AutomaticTransactionManagement broken > > > against the trunk InversionOfControl build. > > > > I work on horn and it is breaking on the horn daily build with knock > > > on effects to other packages that depend on it: > > > >http://www.hornget.net/packages/ioc/castle.facilities.automatictransa.. > > .. > > > > According to the horn build, it fails because the > > > TransactionComponentInspector which inherits from MethodMetaInspector > > > in Castle.Facilities.AutomaticTransactionManagement is trying to > > > override ProcessMeta but the override in > > > TransactionComponentInspector > > > has the following signature: > > > > protected override void ProcessMeta(ComponentModel model, MethodInfo[] > > > methods, MethodMetaModel metaModel) > > > > but ProcessMeta in MethodMetaInspector has the following signature: > > > > protected virtual void ProcessMeta(ComponentModel model, > > > IList<MethodInfo> methods, MethodMetaModel metaModel) > > > > I am really trying to rule out if this is a horn error but I do not > > > think it is. > > > > Can anyone let me know if this is indeed an error? > > > > Cheers > > > > Paul > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Castle Project Development List" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > > . > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] <mailto:castle-project-devel%[email protected]> <castle-project-devel%[email protected] <mailto:castle-project-devel%[email protected]> > > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] <mailto:castle-project-devel%[email protected]> . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
