Hes Siemelink wrote: > > > If you take code from the repository that is not a version > tagged as a > > release, you are downloading ongoing development work. There is no > > guarantee > > that what is currently checked in will work in anyway whatsoever! > > Well, everywhere I worked people always apoligized when they > committed > something that broke the build. A broken build should be an exception.
Agreed, no-one intends to foul-up, but it doesn't alter the point. Taking the latest from HEAD or a branch in the repository does not guarantee working code. It may fail for any number of reasons of which a compile error is perhaps the most obvious symptom. This is why we version and build alpha and release canidates and ask people to test them until we are confident that we have a stable release. This is why two people independently said use the released source. Then you at least know that the code on which you are building has passed these tests. > A LOT of people are running into this problem with the James > HEAD. Most > people just want to play around with the source, to get some > grip on the > matter. James has a rather complicated architecture, so > people try to stab > at it from various angles to get to know it. The most obvious > thing to do is > to download the source package, but the next best thing to > try is CVS. And > if the HEAD doesn't compile, it is not uncommon to ask what's > going on... > > It bothers me a little bit that that some of the main > developers take more > effort in complaining about bewildered users than taking some > rather simple > measures that would really prevent a lot of questions on this list. Occasionally, it is worthwhile expending effort highlighting that there are other resources to draw on. Resources which may help resolve problems more quickly than mailing the lists. And that one contribution everyone can make is to add their experiences and knowledge gained to the Wiki. The more people do this, the more valuable a resource the Wiki becomes. I'm sorry if you read anything I wrote as a complaint. This was a personal observation about how things are and a suggestion as to how everyone in the community can better help each other. > I would suggest to > > 1) Make the HEAD compile. Artur Wronski has recently posted > some patches to > accomplish this. > 2) Put a simple > README_THIS_IS_PROBABLY_NOT_THE_VERSION_YOU_WANT_TO_PLAY_WITH. > txt in the > HEAD pointing to the current active branch. All valid ideas, as would be someone with practical James experience contributing to the Wiki "How To Develop From James Source". -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
