There clearly aren't many Windows fans on this list.:) If no one has suggestions for how this might work I think it further proves the point that there isn't much need to try to support a Windows build. Unless there are objections in the next 72 hours (Monday, September 12, 2016 at 9AM EST), I'm going to assume lazy consensus and close:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1179 and remove the appveyor.yaml. I don't think we should be closed off to having a windows build, but we need someone who is going to take charge of it, make it happen and then maintain it. On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think there's a whole host of cool things we could do with docker, but > my docker skills are not so good so it's hard for me to say how easy it is > to do things with it. > > Anyone know what the Windows workflow would look like for using Docker for > the build? I think there are a couple use cases: > > 1. Modify code with the intent to submit a PR > 2. Build to manually test the artifacts of a development version > > Seems like, in the first case, you could be on windows, modify some code, > build with docker to validate you didn't break stuff and submit a PR. In > the second case, you could -DskipTests and get a build without too much > trouble on windows (unless i'm forgetting that thing go bad there too > though I think that we can at a minimum try to guarantee that we don't > break: mvn clean install -DskipTests on windows). Of course, that won't > help if you're attempting to use GLV artifacts as they won't natively build > on windows since we won't support that. In that case, you'd have to fall > back to docker and get the artifacts somehow?? > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sorry if I'm starting to get off topic, but I also think the docker build >> should be used as part of the release process. This would ensure a >> clean-room build environment that would not be tainted by a developer's >> local environment which may have rogue maven or other artifacts. One word: >> repeatable. >> >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > To elaborate a little more, when the --docs option is selected, an ssh >> > server (among other things) is started and a process is left running >> which >> > keeps the docker image running and accessible. It would be great if >> that >> > could be a separate build option. >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I've been meaning to open a ticket to add some options to the build.sh >> or >> >> pass options to docker. AFAICT, the docker build is hard coded with >> --rm >> >> which removes the docker instance when complete. If that's removed >> then the >> >> instance remains, can be attached to, and files extracted. I believe >> local >> >> filesystems can be mounted as well and shared that way. I'm no docker >> >> expert so perhaps there are alternatives already available. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Stephen Mallette < >> spmalle...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> ah - good point. i don't know anything about that. i assume that is >> >>> possible somehow? >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Jason Plurad <plur...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > The question is whether the distribution zip files generated during >> the >> >>> > build on docker image can be transferred onto your Windows >> filesystem >> >>> for >> >>> > local testing. >> >>> > >> >>> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Stephen Mallette < >> >>> spmalle...@gmail.com> >> >>> > wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > > We have this issue open: >> >>> > > >> >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1179 >> >>> > > >> >>> > > which is about AppVeyor and running a windows build. It hasn't >> moved >> >>> much >> >>> > > recently and Apache Infra (i assume) has disabled the AppVeyor >> >>> > integration >> >>> > > (which in my book is fine b/c most of the time it ended with a red >> >>> "X" on >> >>> > > pull requests). So, the question is, do we care about AppVeyor and >> >>> > > supporting a Windows build? >> >>> > > >> >>> > > For me, i'd say "no" on both (in which case i'd just close this >> >>> ticket). >> >>> > > Some reasons: >> >>> > > >> >>> > > 1. I think that there aren't enough core developers working on >> >>> Windows to >> >>> > > warrant the added effort of trying to maintain a Windows build. >> >>> > > 2. The complexity of the build will increase with each GLV and it >> >>> will be >> >>> > > hard enough trying to keep that sane without Windows. >> >>> > > 3. Doc generation system is bound to shell environments >> >>> > > >> >>> > > Couldn't Windows users fall back to docker for their builds? Seems >> >>> like >> >>> > it >> >>> > > would be easier to maintain a docker/build.bat than it would to >> try >> >>> to >> >>> > make >> >>> > > everything else we have work on windows? thoughts? >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Robert Dale >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Robert Dale >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Robert Dale >> > >
