On 8/15/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would you like access?
If you trust me to poke around without damaging anything when a project goes down, I'm happy to go in and fix it again - sure. > Heck, would you like to be on the Gump PMC? I have to admit my interests lay with getting projects to play together more than the implementation of gump itself, so I'm not sure I could do that justice :) (also not sure if you are serious :) > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/gump/public/workspace/directory-naming$ svn > cleanup > svn: '' is not a working copy directory > > Could you be more specific? I was just going off of: http://vmgump.apache.org/gump/public/apacheds/gump_work/update_apacheds.html naming is fine, but appears to be under a cvs subdirectory of workspace: http://vmgump.apache.org/gump/public/gump_repo/gump_work/update_directory-naming.html > If that's what you really want. Just comment out the <nag/> elements in the > descriptors and no e-mail will be sent. Ok, we can discuss that at greater length on directory-dev. I just wanted to get your opinion on the matter. > I'll point out that in general if your build "keeps breaking" (rather than > being broken all the time) that's because it keeps changing in > non-compatible ways. I know I've always have had loads of trouble getting it > all to compile everytime I tried to look at it. Directory does have a > problem there. Agreed - that should settle as the individual parts stabilise. But as they chase each others development it will be a problem without a monolithic build. Again, I might put this to the list as a separate item. There is an additional problem in having to maintain two descriptors, which seems to be where a lot of the breakages come from. The addition of dependencies is often needing to be hunted down and added to gump. That could also be viewed as a good thing to take addition of dependencies more seriously, but a hassle when its already been well considered. I guess the thing about it is that even if it isn't a big deal, it is annoying that a perfectly legitimate build will break under gump. > Oh, and the second bit I'll mention is that it seems no-one ever pays > attention to the builds for their project unless they get e-mail, so > there'll probably be a 'hump' to get over once you get back to sending > yourself e-mail :-) So densensitized to warning mails now, that I think that's an issue either way :) > There's a few example of bigger maven-based builds (for example I know about > Excalibur) that tend to build fine. Yep, I don't think there is anything wrong with the Maven support. > Mind you -- that's still going to be a while. for gump3, sure - but hopefully some other projects will find directory stuff useful soon. I've already seen talk of MINA on the incubator list today... Thanks for your feedback Leo. - Brett
