The distributed build is not to make it run faster.
It is so that the build process can build the c++ on a linux box, and
the .net build on a windows box. Both can be tied together under a
common build stamp. They can be interop tested (by calling scripts on
both boxes). If the tests pass, the bu
Rupert Smith wrote:
On 3/9/07, Alan Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
distcc for make) not the continuous build system. "Native" make
integration sounds nice but integration via ant is so straightforward
that I can't imagine what additional value it provides.
Well go ahead and write a distrib
The only issue is the credit which AntHill may/may not require and where it
needs to be placed. If it is on an apache web site then we need some sort
of official OK. If this is a requirement of the AntHill license then we
need the OK on this before we move from evaluation of AntHill to actual
us
On 3/9/07, Robert Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1. is AntHill offering a license for any of the contributors to run a
continuous build against the apache subversion project?
2. is there any restriction on the number of continuous build systems thus
set up?
3. if individual contributors / org
On 3/9/07, Alan Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
distcc for make) not the continuous build system. "Native" make
integration sounds nice but integration via ant is so straightforward
that I can't imagine what additional value it provides.
Well go ahead and write a distributed build system via
Robert Godfrey wrote:
Is the continuous build set up part of the project though? That is,
even if
we use AntHillPro (or any other solution) for our own continuous build...
there's nothing stopping anyone else setting up their own continous build
using any technology they like. (Although if the
Is the continuous build set up part of the project though? That is, even if
we use AntHillPro (or any other solution) for our own continuous build...
there's nothing stopping anyone else setting up their own continous build
using any technology they like. (Although if they do so can I strongly
r
Martin Ritchie wrote:
Does apache have windows build machines. We really need to build on
windows (.net) and RHEL 3 & 4 for c++ as well as java. Then interop
test the result. The guys from AntHillPro have said we can have a
licence we just need to sort out how/where we use it.
I'm wary about the
On 3/8/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just want to bring this up
Make sure you send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well as legal@ and
possibly the incubator PMC's before making any final desision. There are
several "free for use with open source projects" that we really shou
Yup, ideally on a machine that all committers have (secure) access to,
can provide web interface to the anthill web console, and can spam us
with broken build emails. Until then, we'll just have to experiment
with a machine behind the firewall. We are not in a position to
provide a machine open to
Does apache have windows build machines. We really need to build on
windows (.net) and RHEL 3 & 4 for c++ as well as java. Then interop
test the result. The guys from AntHillPro have said we can have a
licence we just need to sort out how/where we use it.
On 08/03/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Thursday 08 March 2007 09:13, Marnie McCormack wrote:
> This is interesting - I wasn't aware that Apache had hardware for
> supporting project specific continuous build environments (and I guess
> people to support it ) ?
There is a continuum vm setup that several java projects are using:
http
This is interesting - I wasn't aware that Apache had hardware for supporting
project specific continuous build environments (and I guess people to
support it ) ?
On 3/8/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just want to bring this up
Make sure you send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I just want to bring this up
Make sure you send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well as legal@ and
possibly the incubator PMC's before making any final desision. There are
several "free for use with open source projects" that we really shouldn't
be using do to reverse-marketing stipulatio
I upgraded in the hope of fixing my problems with svn. It didn't solve
that problem but it did at least stay up for longer than it used to.
On 3/8/07, Marnie McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In previous projects we had a lot of problems with cruisecontrol falling
over, very frequently. It ma
In previous projects we had a lot of problems with cruisecontrol falling
over, very frequently. It may be that the current release is more stable
than previously though.
Bfn,
Marnie
Still, I think we should accept the AntHill licence because it is
without doubt a superior product. I need to chase them up about it,
but was hoping to some back to them with an enthusiastic response from
the qpid developers first. Accepting the licence doesn't commit us to
it forever, we can try
Nuno Santos wrote:
Will also need to check regarding the licensing issue... our plan was
to use CruiseControl but I see in the chart that you mentioned -- very
useful, btw -- that it doesn't directly support "make", so we have to
see if we can somehow integrate the C++ build with CruiseControl,
Rupert Smith wrote:
The only condition they asked for is that we put an acknowledgement on
the project web site.
If RedHat are going to supply a box or two (need Windows and Linux),
available on the internet, that would be ideal. I was thinking of
getting it running here and figuring out if I can
The only condition they asked for is that we put an acknowledgement on
the project web site.
As for the number of machines, whether the licence must be attached to
a particular IP address or something, I'm not yet sure. I'll chase up
the request and find out.
If RedHat are going to supply a box
+1 on the free license - but what are the conditions on its use? Obviously
any continuous build system will have to be hosted on some equipment. How
many installations is the license offer good for? If an instance is to be
hosted inside the company which employs one of the contributors what are
I have tried out a few different build servers. I started by looking
at this feature matrix (probably not entirely complete or up to date):
http://damagecontrol.codehaus.org/Continuous+Integration+Server+Feature+Matrix
As you can see there are two that have more green ticks than the
others. Anth
22 matches
Mail list logo
