> I removed the cruisecontrol things when doing the reorganization. That's unfortunate. I missed the fact that things were going to be not just moved, but deleted as well.
> Working with the nightly build I have > found that static checks set up are hard to maintain. After last year's GSoC > Conference I have had a vision of a better solution to this and started > experimenting in a project named SCOSPUB but it is not anywhere near being > useful. I'm not opposed to people trying to compete with CruiseControl or other CI tools, but given that there are over 20 of them already (http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CC/CI+Feature+Matrix), I'd rather just pick the one that works best for us. Hudson has 1-click installation with Java WebStart and only took a few minutes to get configured (not counting my attempt to check out the root of the SVN repository instead of just the trunk), but I'm happy with any system that will work in our environment. > Since the nightly build stores it's result in the argouml-stats subversion > repository the whole history of the result is kept. It is just not all > presented and because of that a little hard to access. That touches on two things that I consider mandatory: 1) higher frequency than nightly (ie "continuous") and 2) super, super easy to use (i.e. dashboard to show current status, graph to show trends, immediate email/IM when someone breaks something). It's pretty clear from the length of time that things stay broken (although not recently), that the current system isn't as useful as it could be in encouraging good behavior from us (the developers). There are tons of projects using CI servers. It shouldn't be that hard for us to choose and implement one. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
