Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Eh... its just my opinion. I thought I had explained why I thought this was a bad idea in previous emails. But... I don't think this is worth debating either. So if you feel strongly about it... then go do it. I still don't like it, but I can live with that. --jason On Dec 5, 2006, at 6:55 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Once again Kevan beat me on the reply ( man, don't you stop for dinner !? ;-) ) Jason, I don't get why you think this is so bad. I'm talking about tweaking my local copy so I can make the doc look closer to the final Geronimo release. If some areas change later on, that's fine, I'm expecting so. But that would be just a very few areas, or you think the whole console and commands will change from now on until the final cut is released? In addition, there are some already reported bugs in the console and I will have to revisit those areas either way. I'm just trying to keep the "revisiting" to a minimum and save some time. This is what I originally asked help for. is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. If there is no way to do it locally due to external dependencies, then fine, I can't, end of story. I'll need to find another way to get a similar result. With that said, I'm about try Kevan's suggestion on tweaking the pom.xml and see how it goes. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to make that configurable. But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version just for a screen shot. Actually I think its a waste of time to even bother with the property thing, but if its low impact, and does not add any more burden/overhead for the normal build/release, then I think its fine. Jason, Hernan wants to create 1.2 documentation. He wants that documentation to be as close to the the actual user experience as he can. I think that is *fantastic*. And I think we could give him a bit of support in his efforts. Here's how it could work: 1) Hernan could make a private update to his pom.xml and build a preview of 1.2. There may be a few stumbling blocks, here. Hard- coded versions, OpenEJB dependencies, etc. 2) Hernan uses this preview build to generate reasonably accurate screenshots. No code is checked into svn. No artifacts are deployed to maven repos. I assume that Hernan's m2 repo/build environment will not build 1.2-SNAPSHOT properly after that. So, when Hernan is done, he wipes out his build tree and maven repo (or geronimo sections of his repo) and reverts back to 1.2-SNAPSHOT. What's so bad about all that? I'm certainly willing to lend Hernan a hand to get his environment up and running. I would hope that others involved with the 1.2 release might actually want to help him out too... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Hernan, here are some additional things that must be done: 1. Each pom.xml has a ... which has "1.2-SNAPSHOT" string in it. It must be changed to 1.2. It can be easily fixed with a script. 2. Build openejb locally using mvn -o -DgeronimoVersion=1.2 Thanks Anita --- Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: > > > Hi All, > > is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the > > revision number? > > It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 > > documentation. > > Hernan, > You can always update your pom.xml locally and change the Geronimo > version from 1.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.2. Like: > > -1.2-SNAPSHOT > +1.2 > > > I haven't tried it. Possible that you'll run into some build > problems/ > dependency issues... > > --kevan > Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Once again Kevan beat me on the reply ( man, don't you stop for dinner !? ;-) ) Jason, I don't get why you think this is so bad. I'm talking about tweaking my local copy so I can make the doc look closer to the final Geronimo release. If some areas change later on, that's fine, I'm expecting so. But that would be just a very few areas, or you think the whole console and commands will change from now on until the final cut is released? In addition, there are some already reported bugs in the console and I will have to revisit those areas either way. I'm just trying to keep the "revisiting" to a minimum and save some time. This is what I originally asked help for. is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. If there is no way to do it locally due to external dependencies, then fine, I can't, end of story. I'll need to find another way to get a similar result. With that said, I'm about try Kevan's suggestion on tweaking the pom.xml and see how it goes. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to make that configurable. But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version just for a screen shot. Actually I think its a waste of time to even bother with the property thing, but if its low impact, and does not add any more burden/overhead for the normal build/release, then I think its fine. Jason, Hernan wants to create 1.2 documentation. He wants that documentation to be as close to the the actual user experience as he can. I think that is *fantastic*. And I think we could give him a bit of support in his efforts. Here's how it could work: 1) Hernan could make a private update to his pom.xml and build a preview of 1.2. There may be a few stumbling blocks, here. Hard-coded versions, OpenEJB dependencies, etc. 2) Hernan uses this preview build to generate reasonably accurate screenshots. No code is checked into svn. No artifacts are deployed to maven repos. I assume that Hernan's m2 repo/build environment will not build 1.2-SNAPSHOT properly after that. So, when Hernan is done, he wipes out his build tree and maven repo (or geronimo sections of his repo) and reverts back to 1.2-SNAPSHOT. What's so bad about all that? I'm certainly willing to lend Hernan a hand to get his environment up and running. I would hope that others involved with the 1.2 release might actually want to help him out too... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Eh... i'm all for helping folks out... but I don't really see the value in this... and more so I see some potential dangers. I don't think its worth it... but I'm not going to lobby to get the effort shutdown... but I'm not gonna walk you to the plank either. --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:04 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to make that configurable. But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version just for a screen shot. Actually I think its a waste of time to even bother with the property thing, but if its low impact, and does not add any more burden/overhead for the normal build/release, then I think its fine. Jason, Hernan wants to create 1.2 documentation. He wants that documentation to be as close to the the actual user experience as he can. I think that is *fantastic*. And I think we could give him a bit of support in his efforts. Here's how it could work: 1) Hernan could make a private update to his pom.xml and build a preview of 1.2. There may be a few stumbling blocks, here. Hard- coded versions, OpenEJB dependencies, etc. 2) Hernan uses this preview build to generate reasonably accurate screenshots. No code is checked into svn. No artifacts are deployed to maven repos. I assume that Hernan's m2 repo/build environment will not build 1.2- SNAPSHOT properly after that. So, when Hernan is done, he wipes out his build tree and maven repo (or geronimo sections of his repo) and reverts back to 1.2-SNAPSHOT. What's so bad about all that? I'm certainly willing to lend Hernan a hand to get his environment up and running. I would hope that others involved with the 1.2 release might actually want to help him out too... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to make that configurable. But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version just for a screen shot. Actually I think its a waste of time to even bother with the property thing, but if its low impact, and does not add any more burden/overhead for the normal build/release, then I think its fine. Jason, Hernan wants to create 1.2 documentation. He wants that documentation to be as close to the the actual user experience as he can. I think that is *fantastic*. And I think we could give him a bit of support in his efforts. Here's how it could work: 1) Hernan could make a private update to his pom.xml and build a preview of 1.2. There may be a few stumbling blocks, here. Hard-coded versions, OpenEJB dependencies, etc. 2) Hernan uses this preview build to generate reasonably accurate screenshots. No code is checked into svn. No artifacts are deployed to maven repos. I assume that Hernan's m2 repo/build environment will not build 1.2- SNAPSHOT properly after that. So, when Hernan is done, he wipes out his build tree and maven repo (or geronimo sections of his repo) and reverts back to 1.2-SNAPSHOT. What's so bad about all that? I'm certainly willing to lend Hernan a hand to get his environment up and running. I would hope that others involved with the 1.2 release might actually want to help him out too... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
I think this is kinda dangerous... For example, what if you had that property to make it look like the 1.2 final release and then the UI was actually changed. You now have confused users wondering why the 1.2 shot on the website is different from the final. And what happens when 1.2.1 is release? Need to make all new screen shots? I think its a waste of time. --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 2:05 PM, Hernan Cunico wrote: yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release. But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release covered. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2- SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release. But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release covered. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2-SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release. But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release covered. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2-SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release. But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release covered. Cheers! Hernan Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2-SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to make that configurable. But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version just for a screen shot. Actually I think its a waste of time to even bother with the property thing, but if its low impact, and does not add any more burden/ overhead for the normal build/release, then I think its fine. --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:47 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2- SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
I think that is asking for trouble... lots of trouble. --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Kevan Miller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Hi All, is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. Hernan, You can always update your pom.xml locally and change the Geronimo version from 1.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.2. Like: -1.2-SNAPSHOT +1.2 I haven't tried it. Possible that you'll run into some build problems/dependency issues... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must contain "1.2- SNAPSHOT" or "1.2-rxxx" for artifact names. This seems like a pretty reasonable request, to me... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Hi All, is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. Hernan, You can always update your pom.xml locally and change the Geronimo version from 1.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.2. Like: -1.2-SNAPSHOT +1.2 I haven't tried it. Possible that you'll run into some build problems/ dependency issues... --kevan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Why does it matter? If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then why bother updating it? --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: basically "screenshots". In the doc I'm including lost of screenshots (both terminal and console) and these either show *SNAPSHOT* or *r480769*. When we release v1.2 all these disappear so I would have to re-take those screenshots that are affected, which is a large percentage. Cheers! Hernan Jason Dillon wrote: Why would that save you time? --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Hi All, is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. Cheers! Hernan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
basically "screenshots". In the doc I'm including lost of screenshots (both terminal and console) and these either show *SNAPSHOT* or *r480769*. When we release v1.2 all these disappear so I would have to re-take those screenshots that are affected, which is a large percentage. Cheers! Hernan Jason Dillon wrote: Why would that save you time? --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Hi All, is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. Cheers! Hernan
Re: SNAPSHOT - Revision #
Why would that save you time? --jason On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote: Hi All, is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number? It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation. Cheers! Hernan
