> I'm not sure what you mean by "instead of". Gump is a different beast > entirely, and isn't related to whether you use CVS or SVN. > It's more of a > continuous integration tool, although its goal is to ensure > that changes > in one project don't inadvertently break other projects, > rather than to > work on a project by project basis.
sure like cruise control! Not Gump *instead of* CVS/Subversion ;-) instead of migrating process, since we here have guys that relay on CVS... sorry for missunderstanding email... > > Does anybody know much about GUMP? > > I'm not an expert by any means. But I know enough to see that > MyFaces is > already building successfully in Gump. For example, see the log at: > > http://brutus.apache.org/gump/public/buildLog.html Ah! I expected, that should be setup by a project, but still done. Do you also know where the nightly builds are stored? or aren't they stored? > > Btw. Martin, are you using GUMP inside > > of Struts? > > Gump isn't typically used by projects themselves. Rather, > there is a Gump > installation that builds just about everything at the ASF (and many > projects from elsewhere as well) several times a day. If your project > breaks, you will receive "nag" messages telling you that. thanks for pointing this out! that was new for me, that it also builds MyFaces. -Matthias > -- > Martin Cooper > > > > Thanks, > > Matthias > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 6:35 PM > >> To: MyFaces Development > >> Subject: Re: A few more suggestions > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Bill Dudney wrote: > >> > >>> Ted, > >>> > >>> Would it be possible for us to stay in CVS for the next > few months > >>> then do the conversion? I've not had to do it myself but > I've read > >> that the cvs2svn > >>> script is supposed to do a good job of moving all the > >> history over. Once the > >>> IDE plugins catch up we could make the jump. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >> > >> I'm not Ted ;-) but I would say that shouldn't be a problem - > >> depending, of course, on how many months a "few" turns out > to be. ;-) > >> But we can cross that bridge when we come to it. > >> > >> The cvs2svn tool does a great job of preserving > everything, history > >> and all. Once you're ready to make the move, the usual practice > >> is to load > >> everything into a test repo, let people play around with it > >> for a couple > >> of days, and then give infrasructure the nod. It should be > quick and > >> painless for all involved. > >> > >> -- > >> Martin Cooper > >> > >> > >>> -bd- > >>> > >>> On Jan 17, 2005, at 4:26 PM, Ted Husted wrote: > >>> > >>>> Moving to Subversion was "strongly suggested" when we > drafted the > >>>> incubator proposal. However, the developers felt that the CVS IDE > >> tools were more > >>>> mature, and that they would prefer to wait before switching. > >>>> > >>>> To receive the CVS logs, subscribe to > >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > >>>> > >>>> -Ted. > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:21:00 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> �On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Sean Schofield wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> �I have a few more suggestions for the MyFaces > development team: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> �#1) Consider moving from CVS to Subversion (SVN) when > >> its time to > >>>>>> �leave the incubator. �Apache has both types of repositories > >>>>>> �available. Struts just recently moved to SVN and > people like it. > >>>>>> �I'm not totally familiar with advantages vs. > >> disadvantages but it > >>>>>> �seems to be a lot more flexible. �If this is something we'd > >>>>>> �consider than it would be best to do it at the same time as > >>>>>> �MyFaces leaves the incubator. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> �I would strongly encourage this. Apart from the fact > that all of > >>>>> �the ASF repositories will eventually be required to > move from CVS > >>>>> �to SVN, SVN really does have some excellent advantages. The two > >>>>> �biggest, in my experience, are atomic commits (meaning that all > >>>>> �changes within one commit are handled as a single > >> transaction) and > >>>>> �ease of refactoring. From an infrastructure perspective, using > >>>>> �moving to SVN means that individual Unix accounts for every > >>>>> �committer are no longer required. > >>>>> > >>>>>> �#2) Regardless of whether we use SVN or CVS, it would > be nice to > >>>>>> �email the developer's list when users check in. �This is a > >>>>>> �standard practice with other Apache projects and helps > >> developers > >>>>>> �keep track of changes to the codebase. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> �Yep. Not sure why this isn't happening already. > >>>>> > >>>>> �-- > >>>>> �Martin Cooper > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> �sean > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > >
