On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Until today, i thought that no matter how well maintained, a
dependency graph would always be a general graph, and cycles would
develop, sooner of later (it is still amazing that gump reached 750
projects without explicit
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
It came to me as a revelation today: one of the problems with gump that
I could never figure out is the fact that circular dependencies prevent
the ability to bootstrap after a certain point.
snip/
In fact, a particular version is the crystallization of all the time
Isn't the fallback idea for artifacts that is already in Gump something
like the time travel? If project A depends on B, and A.today can't build
with B.today, then try with B.yesterday. If that fails, then try
B.daybeforeyesterday. If that fails, then try
B.daybeforedaybeforeyesterday!
I agree
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Until today, i thought that no matter how well maintained, a
dependency graph would always be a general graph, and cycles would
develop, sooner of later (it is still amazing that gump reached 750
projects
Leo Simons wrote:
So while we can probably build gump to work like this (heck, it already
works like this manually), we'd need to do some powerful visualisation
to make people understand what's going on.
eheh, here is where the fun (for me, as a research scientist) starts :-)
A:20041215 failed
Stefano, my responses below...
Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/16/2004 05:51:17 PM:
[...]
A --(needs)-- B
and
B --(needs)-- A
Until today, i thought that no matter how well maintained, a dependency
graph would always be a general graph, and cycles would
