I have decided to step away from Gump for a while, and the main reason is that I find it depressing to work with... Increments of overall success is slow, and decrements of overall success is fast. And during the period of big showstoppers, entropy sets in in all non-building projects so that when the big showstopper is resolved, a lot of small cases are back.
dude, I know how you feel!
I find that there must be something fundamentally wrong with Gump, if it self-deteriorate so quickly.
hmm. I think that the basic outline you've given above is correct. It simply is much easier to destroy a build (give me any java project out there and I can stop it from building with a single-character change in one file. Probably can do it blind-folded, too.) than to fix one.
That said, we can change *a lot* about those negative feelings. Work in progress. Suggestions (complaints, even!) welcome.
Personally I think the solution is that the Gump group needs to work more intimately with the Ant/Maven and other build system groups, to put in the continous integration support directly into those tools, instead of the manual labour of bolting it on externally.
hmm. In the case of ant, it'll just have to be "bolted on" since it doesn't have a "metadata descriptor" model. You might call the stuff you "bolt on" magic or maven or whatever. The same will probably remain true for tools that build using configure && make && make test.
I might be back later, but for now I wish you all Good Luck.
thanks for all your hard work. Let's hope gump evolves into something that makes you want to come back and continue your efforts ;)
cheers,
- Leo
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
