RE: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
Anyone can download snapshots... they are just huge! --jason > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jboss- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Heath > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 9:30 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2 > > Actually, a SF project administrator can download a Nightly CVS Tree > Tarball from the admin section on SF. The tarball contains all the > "blah.java,v" files. So doing a CVS testbed is possible. > > Mike Heath > > On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 12:00, David Jencks wrote: > > Ummm think about it... for CVSROOT changes that would mean being easily > > able to get a mirror of the project cvs files (the blah.java,v files), > > which AFAIK sourceforge does not enable. > > > > Perhaps a more doable alternative is a list of what to check after > CVSROOT > > changes. > > > > david jencks > > > > On 2002.10.08 12:33:30 -0400 Tom Coleman wrote: > > > > > > Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? > > > > > > You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without > > > thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS > > > changes should be made even more cautiously. > > > > > > This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal > with. > > > > > > > > > > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > > > > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* > > > projects > > > > function by the days end. > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > > ___ > > > Jboss-development mailing list > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > ___ > > Jboss-development mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
Actually, a SF project administrator can download a Nightly CVS Tree Tarball from the admin section on SF. The tarball contains all the "blah.java,v" files. So doing a CVS testbed is possible. Mike Heath On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 12:00, David Jencks wrote: > Ummm think about it... for CVSROOT changes that would mean being easily > able to get a mirror of the project cvs files (the blah.java,v files), > which AFAIK sourceforge does not enable. > > Perhaps a more doable alternative is a list of what to check after CVSROOT > changes. > > david jencks > > On 2002.10.08 12:33:30 -0400 Tom Coleman wrote: > > > > Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? > > > > You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without > > thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS > > changes should be made even more cautiously. > > > > This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal with. > > > > > > > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > > > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* > > projects > > > function by the days end. > > > > > > > > > --- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > ___ > > Jboss-development mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > > > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
RE: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
> To effectivly test I would need to replicate the entire repository. FWIW, this could easily be done with rsync, but, as David pointed out, SF.net probably doesn't allow this level of access to their servers. - Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jason Dillon Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 3:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2 To effectivly test I would need to replicate the entire repository. --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Tom Coleman wrote: > > Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? > > You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without > thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS > changes should be made even more cautiously. > > This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal with. > > > > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* projects > > function by the days end. > > > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
To effectivly test I would need to replicate the entire repository. --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Tom Coleman wrote: > > Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? > > You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without > thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS > changes should be made even more cautiously. > > This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal with. > > > > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* projects > > function by the days end. > > > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
Ummm think about it... for CVSROOT changes that would mean being easily able to get a mirror of the project cvs files (the blah.java,v files), which AFAIK sourceforge does not enable. Perhaps a more doable alternative is a list of what to check after CVSROOT changes. david jencks On 2002.10.08 12:33:30 -0400 Tom Coleman wrote: > > Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? > > You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without > thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS > changes should be made even more cautiously. > > This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal with. > > > > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* > projects > > function by the days end. > > > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS changes should be made even more cautiously. This project already has too many 'moving targets' to try to deal with. > > I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if > something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* projects > function by the days end. > --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
[JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 & 3.2
I have to modify CVSROOT/modules to test, so please be patient if something does not function. I will make sure that all jboss-* projects function by the days end. --jason --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
