Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
compile-scratchpad:
[javac] Compiling 39 source files to /home/rubys/jakarta/cocoon-2.1/build/cocoon-20030404/scratchpad/dest
[javac] /home/rubys/jakarta/cocoon-2.1/build/cocoon-20030404/scratchpad/src/org/apache/cocoon/transformation/JexlTransformer.java:75: package org.apache.commons.jexl does not exist
[javac] import org.apache.commons.jexl.Expression;
I'm starting to hate gump!
GRRRRRR.
Stefano.
Care to provide a bit more details about what you don't care for?
Oh, no, the above was meant to be a joke. i forgot to add a smiley somewhere :)
I certainly would have eased the introduction of Gump to cocoon a bit more gently than the way that you dove in, but I'm confident that your way will work out too.
yes, "gently" is not my kind of word recently, but since I'm the one cleaning up my own mess, I don't mind that much.
I love gump. I love it so much that I'm spending my time to make sure it works. and it works reliably.
what is driving me nuts is the 24-hours try/fail cycle, but now that you and Steven are helping me out on cocoondev.org, things will be much less frustrating.
Summary of what I've seen so far:
1) Gump has already found a potential future backwards compatibility problem that was introduced into Avalon but never made it to release.
yep
2) Gump is getting cocoon to think more seriously about what is core and what is extensions. For my tastes, the current core of cocoon still has too many dependencies - I tend to prefer a minimal core myself. But in any case, this is not for Gump to decide as to which dependencies are OK and which ones are not.
believe me, we'll be getting there. the proposal about 'modules' and 'blocks' will make the cocoon look more like a microkernel.
If you would like a suggestion: I would remove all nags from builds that you don't expect to be succeeding yet on a nightly basis, and then only add them in when a failure would be a surprise. Then simply check the builds every few days, and if you can bring another block or two online per week then that is fine.
that's a good suggestion.
Even better, I'll have it nag only me as long as I'm not confident about them, how does that sound?
-- Stefano.
