On 03/11/2013 02:55 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
So I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4640, which makes
deprecation clear and gives us at least 1 more release cycle to fix any issues
that crop up. Does that seem reasonable?
That seems fair, but I'll reiterate my broken
Would it also be an idea to have the 0.22 Automake build echo a message
indicating that it will become deprecated in the next release and removed
in the release after that?
Lots of people dont read readme files and thus wont actually find out until
they try 0.24 and discover it wont work until
On 03/11/2013 02:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
...
I agree with this approach, but I suggest that we prioritise getting the
cmake build instructions into The 0.22 Readme, and suggest in the
On 03/15/2013 10:24 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Would it also be an idea to have the 0.22 Automake build echo a message
indicating that it will become deprecated in the next release and removed
in the release after that?
Lots of people dont read readme files and thus wont actually find out until
I'd definitely agree with that.
This is the sort of thing that should be shouted from the rooftops to
give everyone fair warning and to minimise the likelihood of I didn't
notice.
Having a deprecation echo along with echoing please do try cmake
instead and let us know if it doesn't work
Jansen
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
On 03/11/2013 02:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
...
I agree with this approach, but I suggest that we prioritise getting
Can I ask which platforms/OSs are are going to be supported by this build.
Obviously you guys care about Fedora/RedHat based systems, and
Windows... But would not building on Ubuntu (for instance) be
considered a blocker?
-- Rob
On 15 March 2013 15:29, Alan Conway acon...@redhat.com wrote:
It would by me :-) and I guess by you given a previous post you made
about automake finally working for you too.
I rather suspect we might be the guinea pigs :-D
I did hear from a colleague of mine that cmake didn't work on a fairly
old RH version he had to use, I suggested that he post
On 15 March 2013 16:14, Fraser Adams fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
It would by me :-) and I guess by you given a previous post you made about
automake finally working for you too.
I rather suspect we might be the guinea pigs :-D
Indeed - though I would also note that the Jenkins CI
: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:26 AM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Cc: Andrew Stitcher; Cliff Jansen
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
On 03/11/2013 02:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
...
I
On 03/15/2013 10:35 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Its quicker for me to reply to this than your other mail, so...
I think the reason people dont want to enable the hard-fail at this point is
that its been almost 4 years since the Cmake build was added and while we said
at the time we would
Message-
From: Alan Conway [mailto:acon...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:26 AM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Cc: Andrew Stitcher; Cliff Jansen
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
On 03/11/2013 02:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan
...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:26 AM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Cc: Andrew Stitcher; Cliff Jansen
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
On 03/11/2013 02:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew
+1 Andrew's proposed schedule and Alan's fiendish scheme.
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Cc: Cliff Jansen cliffjan...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:59:52 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system
On 03/09/2013 09:24 AM, Fraser Adams wrote:
On 08/03/13 21:41, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
. Anyway if it is anything the dev list is for discussion amongst the
qpid developers themselves (rather than developers who use qpid) and
surely they are the ons who get to vote about the build system.
So... apologies if I am missing them, but are there instructions as to
how to build the C++ codebase using cmake?
My experience with proton was that
mkdir build ; cd build ; cmake .. ; make
Would work... But that fails to compile with the C++ broker on my system.
-- Rob
On 11 March 2013
There are build instructions for linux and windows in the top-level
README, but the cmake line only differs from what you are doing in
its install prefix:
cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr ..
- Original Message -
So... apologies if I am missing them, but are there instructions
Hmmm...
it never gets far enough for the install prefix to make a difference
:-( (incidentally where is cmake mentioned in the docs - I can see it
in the windows README-winsdk.txt but not in README.txt which talks
exclusively about linux AFAICT)
rob@humpy:~/qpid-trunk/qpid/cpp/build$ make clean
On 03/11/2013 03:45 PM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
So... apologies if I am missing them, but are there instructions as to
how to build the C++ codebase using cmake?
My experience with proton was that
mkdir build ; cd build ; cmake .. ; make
Would work... But that fails to compile with the C++ broker
On 03/08/2013 01:07 PM, Cliff Jansen wrote:
Not that this speaks directly to the issue of instant deletion versus
a more dignified old-folks home retirement, but I would point out that
CMake is the sole build mechanism for AMQP 1.0 support in C/C++. You
can't avoid it going forward for at least
OK... So on a completely fresh checkout (it seems like it doesn't deal
very well with having some remenants of an old build on automake
somewhere - even though I blew away everything I could see)...
it gets a lot further, but then dies with the following:
inking CXX shared library
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 18:09 +0100, Rob Godfrey wrote:
OK... So on a completely fresh checkout (it seems like it doesn't deal
very well with having some remenants of an old build on automake
somewhere - even though I blew away everything I could see)...
it gets a lot further, but then dies
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 12:51 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/08/2013 01:07 PM, Cliff Jansen wrote:
Not that this speaks directly to the issue of instant deletion versus
a more dignified old-folks home retirement, but I would point out that
CMake is the sole build mechanism for AMQP 1.0
On 11 March 2013 18:21, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 18:09 +0100, Rob Godfrey wrote:
OK... So on a completely fresh checkout (it seems like it doesn't deal
very well with having some remenants of an old build on automake
somewhere - even though I blew away
-Original Message-
From: Rob Godfrey [mailto:rob.j.godf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 1:32 PM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
On 11 March 2013 18:21, Andrew Stitcher astitc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 18
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 12:51 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/08/2013 01:07 PM, Cliff Jansen wrote:
Not that this speaks directly to the issue of instant deletion versus
a more dignified old-folks home retirement, but I would point out that
CMake is
On 03/11/2013 02:35 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
So... the automake build works fine (which is a new experience on
Ubuntu :-) )
So I'd personally not be keen to remove the automake build until the
cmake build works on my platform :-)
-- Rob
Ha ha, yeah that was the original source of my
So I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4640, which
makes deprecation clear and gives us at least 1 more release cycle to
fix any issues that crop up. Does that seem reasonable?
That seems fair, but I'll reiterate my broken record and suggest that
now seems like a real
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
...
I agree with this approach, but I suggest that we prioritise getting the
cmake build instructions into The 0.22 Readme, and suggest in the
release notes that people prefer to use cmake
On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 09:24 +, Fraser Adams wrote:
...
I'm surprised that you are surprised. I'd have thought that the place
most people first look for Qpid downloads is:
http://qpid.apache.org/download.html
and that only actually mentions Fedora packages
Hmm, interesting, when I
On 08/03/13 21:41, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
I'm genuinely surprised that a significant number of people are still
compiling stuff from source themselves (except what they are actually
working on themselves of course).
I'm surprised that you are surprised. I'd have thought that the place
most
Having 2 build systems is a waste of time and a source of confusion. We
introduced the cmake build with the intent that it would replace the automake
system, I think the time has come to say farewell to automake. The cmake system
is ready: it covers the same ground as automake and more (esp.
+1
I can help with cmake issues as well. I'm not aware of any problems, but the
most likely spot is Linux packaging.
-Original Message-
From: Alan Conway [mailto:acon...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 9:57 AM
To: Qpid Dev
Subject: Proposal: get rid of automake build
Hi Alan,
Personally I'd rather cmake was given the heave ho ;-
for all of it's pain automake is something of a defacto standard for a
ton of projects.
Re Anyone know of specific issues that need to be addressed in cmake?
yeah, I don't have cmake installed :-D sorry. I'm just messing.
Hi Fraser,
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 10:36 AM
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system.
Hi Alan,
Personally I'd rather cmake was given the heave ho ;-
Do you
On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 15:36 +, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi Alan,
Personally I'd rather cmake was given the heave ho ;-
for all of it's pain automake is something of a defacto standard for a
ton of projects.
cmake is also a de facto standard (just for a different - albeit smaller
- set of
This seems sensible, although it does raise the question of what is
'dev' about this list if the choice of build system is a 'user' issue!
Andrew
That was pretty much the point that Gordon was making :-) There's kind
of a blurry line between Qpid users and developers - certainly given
that
Not that this speaks directly to the issue of instant deletion versus
a more dignified old-folks home retirement, but I would point out that
CMake is the sole build mechanism for AMQP 1.0 support in C/C++. You
can't avoid it going forward for at least part of your build.
Also since a lot of the
On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 18:06 +, Fraser Adams wrote:
This seems sensible, although it does raise the question of what is
'dev' about this list if the choice of build system is a 'user' issue!
Andrew
That was pretty much the point that Gordon was making :-) There's kind
of a blurry
39 matches
Mail list logo
