On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote:
> Concurrently there are a few other things that are going to impact > this. For example, we need to bring the otests into the picture as > these need to be kept running cleanly as changes are made and there > are undoubtedly things that are still in 1.x that we don't yet have in > 2.x that we need to introduce > Its not just otests and other 1.x stuff - the 2.x code base and build time will inevitably continue to grow over time as we add new functions, features, test, samples, demos, tutorials, gsoc projects etc etc. We can try to tweak the existing tests to make individual modules build a bit quicker but in the big scheme of things thats just not going to make much of a long term significant difference (IMHO). > So coming back to the post that started this thread I'm still > interested in looking at some profiles etc. to see if we can ease the > pain. I'll experiment when I have some time. > Me too. A while back i added some build profiles based on what Giorgio had been suggesting, right now theres just 'base' and 'jms' profiles, I used them for a little while but found they didn't really work that well for day to day dev use, has anyone else tried them? I'll help with tinkering with profiles to see if they can be made more usable, for example we can probably at least do things with them now that can be used with Hudson to make the nightly builds more robust, but I'm increasingly coming to the view that the only way we'll get a significantly better development experience is by restructuring svn so things are grouped into more separate functional areas. ...ant
