Stephan Michels wrote: > > Am Di, den 16.03.2004 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler um 07:58: > > Hi Stephan, could you please revert your changes? Joerg > already asked > > you to do so and I think we should either revert or change > the current > > behaviour. It's really annoying to have all this "Dismiss" > > messages. There are hundreds of them that weren't there before. > > The "Dismiss: ..." messages means only that the patch wasn't applied. > I can easily omit these messages. > That would be great!
Carsten > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Joerg Heinicke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 3:03 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/tools/src/anttasks > > > XConfToolTask.java > > > > > > On 12.03.2004 14:29, Stephan Michels wrote: > > > > > > > In the orginal form of the blocks-build.xsl, we had > > > separate targets > > > > for the patch files. But it was incredible slow. Then I merge > > > > these targets to one target, and rewrote to the XConf task to a > > > > MatchingTask, which allow to execute more than one patches. > > > > But it doesn't preserves the dependencies, then Carsten > cuts the > > > > target in to several target again, to solve this problem. > > > > Now, with latest change it works again. > > > > > > > > I tend to agree with you Joerg, separate targets are much > > > more elegant. > > > > But in the real world I have real problems, like a build > > > time von 4min > > > > 25sec on a 2.4GHz Intel system. Which is, by the way, > > > > unacceptable, IMHO. > > > > > > > > So, should I revert the change to have a more elegant build > > > file with > > > > bigger build time?! .... ehrmm ... I think not. > > > > > > To be honest, such statements enrage me at least a bit. You talk > > > about time, but you forget the time to maintain this additional > > > dependency resolving. Starting with the missing .xweb patches you > > > have now to go on searching for bugs - things that > already have been > > > working. For having a look on this issue I removed ojb, > database and > > > hsqldb block from the excluded ones. A simple build (Cocoon was > > > previously built with only cforms and xsp enabled) - and many > > > patches of those blocks were not applied. Only a clean > build made it > > > working - partly, see above. If I need to do every time a clean > > > build to get this thing correctly working, I don't see > how you can > > > gain time. This might be only a simple bug somewhere, > maybe only a > > > typo - but I talk about the principle - which, I know, > often ends in > > > obstinacy. > > Was a minor bug, should now be solved. > > > > IMO, yes, we should revert it. I prefer the elegancy much > more about > > > the speed. And to add Carsten's argument: > > > Additionally it forces us "keeping the dependencies correct". > > > > > > Excuse me, if I have forgotten to add 'rant' around it ... > > Yes, you have. > > But okay, when I will revert my changes to version 1.17 from > 2003/05/05 > > Stephan. >
