While I did not have the chance to look into it I noticed your Slide
installation displays the ACLs set. How did you configure that?

Oliver

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:41:05 +0200, Thomas Draier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi,
> i finally got something working -  it is not yet as complete as the
> current build system, but main targets are working, like generating
> jars, distributions, documentation, .. i've got 2 main projects, server
> and clients, each of one separated in multiple small subprojects. i did
> not include yet projector, wck, and the testsuite module. the jars are
> not included within the projects, as they should be on a separate
> repository. most of them are available on the standard maven repository
> and will be downloaded automatically, but some are not available for
> release or licensing issue, so you'll need to install all those jars
> manually. i may also be able to give you access to my maven repository,
> so that downloads will be managed by maven. i'll check if it's
> possible, that will be much easier as you will just need to type a
> single command to download everything and make the distrib. anyway, if
> you want to a have a first look at the whole thing, i've bundled all
> the project in a tgz file available at
> http://www.codeva.net/jahia/webdav/users/root/public/maven.tgz (on a
> slide repository, of course ;-)
> thomas
> 
> Le 19 oct. 04, � 17:27, James Mason a �crit :
> 
> 
> 
> > Well, it can't hurt to look, and if you're offering to do the work ;).
> > Once you have something done we can all evaluate it and then put it to
> > a
> > vote.
> >
> > -James
> >
> > On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 03:53, Thomas Draier wrote:
> >> hi james,
> >> if you're interested i would be happy to try to make the base
> >> structure
> >> and project files for the different slide subprojects - i agree that
> >> all developers still have to download and install maven, and that it's
> >> real turn off, but it is more or less as simple as ant to install and
> >> imho the benefits are so huge you quickly become addict :-)
> >> thomas
> >>
> >> Le 18 oct. 04, � 18:03, James Mason a �crit :
> >>
> >>> Thomas,
> >>>
> >>> I need to spend some time playing with maven before I could support
> >>> moving to it. I really like ant, so if maven enhances what ant brings
> >>> I'm all for that. However, as a developer who's never had maven
> >>> installed it's been a real turn-off for me to come across a project
> >>> that
> >>> requires me to download and setup a whole new environment just to
> >>> build
> >>> their code.
> >>>
> >>> If maven is simple enough to setup and integrates well enough with
> >>> the
> >>> existing development environments of the committers/contributors to
> >>> Slide, then changing build systems is a possibility.
> >>>
> >>> -James
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 03:47, Thomas Draier wrote:
> >>>> hi,
> >>>> i still have 2 patches waiting in the bugzilla , 31196     & 31265 ,
> >>>> can
> >>>> anybody have a look at it before changing the structure ?
> >>>> restructuration of the cvs would be great - and that also would be
> >>>> very
> >>>> nice to use maven to make the builds, as it completely clarifies
> >>>> dependencies with other modules, that is very helpful when
> >>>> integrating
> >>>> in other projects, and it gives a "standard" file organization for
> >>>> all
> >>>> the project files. maven is replacing ant in more and more projects
> >>>> and
> >>>> i believe that would be the good time to integrate it into slide,
> >>>> what
> >>>> do you think ?
> >>>> thomas
> >>>>
> >>>> Le 18 oct. 04, � 09:24, Oliver Zeigermann a �crit :
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 to all this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think we could begin restructuring the CVS HEAD soon - just make
> >>>>> sure everyone committed their patches before - and have it avaiable
> >>>>> for general release in 2.2
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Oliver
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James Mason schrieb:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Big +1 from me. Your thread in the PMC actually got me thinking
> >>>>>> along
> >>>>>> similar lines. I'd like to take it a little further than just
> >>>>>> separate
> >>>>>> release cycles, though.
> >>>>>> Currently the Slide project is structured something like:
> >>>>>>  +- Slide Server
> >>>>>>  \
> >>>>>>   +- Slide Client
> >>>>>>   +- Proposals
> >>>>>>   +- Everything else (etc)
> >>>>>> which means everything is effectively a child of the server. I'd
> >>>>>> like
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> make the Server a sibling of everything else rather than being the
> >>>>>> parent. I think this better reflects the current state of the
> >>>>>> project,
> >>>>>> gives more prominence to the other components, and will make
> >>>>>> builds
> >>>>>> easier to manage.
> >>>>>> I'd like to see this structure reflected in both cvs and the
> >>>>>> documentation/website. I think the former will make builds/release
> >>>>>> easier and the latter will make it easier for people to find what
> >>>>>> they're looking for (as well as giving more prominence to the
> >>>>>> other
> >>>>>> components).
> >>>>>> I think this kind of separation would also provide a good gauge of
> >>>>>> whether Slide could stand on its own as a TLP. At this point I
> >>>>>> don't
> >>>>>> think we could (nor do we need to), but if we can organize the
> >>>>>> complexity we currently have and make it clear how current and
> >>>>>> future
> >>>>>> components fit under the Slide umbrella I think we'll be mostly
> >>>>>> ready
> >>>>>> if/when there is enough external interest in Slide to warrant a
> >>>>>> TLP.
> >>>>>> -James
> >>>>>> On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 22:35, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> >>>>>>> Folks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Slide has become a large project with lots of components.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After some experience with the testsuite which until 2.1b2 has
> >>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>> been released at all and the projector which did not make it into
> >>>>>>> the 2.1b2, but seems to be almost ready for prime time, it might
> >>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>> a good idea to release at least these components in a decoupled
> >>>>>>> release process:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - projector: WebDAV workflow and rendering
> >>>>>>> - testsuite: most complete WebDAV testsuite
> >>>>>>> - wck: simple WebDAV enabling kit for enterprise / business
> >>>>>>> systems
> >>>>>>> of all kinds
> >>>>>>> - WebDAV client library (maybe along with ant tasks and
> >>>>>>> connector)
> >>>>>>> - WebDAV command line cient
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I only recently understood this is possible without any problem
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> would make the release cycle - which is HUGE for Slide because of
> >>>>>>> its complexity - much shorter. We still could have a general and
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>> bundled release once in a while. But projector could release
> >>>>>>> earlier
> >>>>>>> than the general Slide 2.2 which can not be expected before 2005.
> >>>>>>> Same thing with WCK, it is at least ready for a beta, but of
> >>>>>>> course
> >>>>>>> can not be part of the 2.1 release, so it would have to wait
> >>>>>>> until
> >>>>>>> 2005 as well. I have big  expectations in WCK concerning a boost
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> publicity for Slide...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Additionally, the server and client parts may have different
> >>>>>>> development speeds, and might be release asynchronously, which is
> >>>>>>> fine as they communicate over WebDAV (2.1 has been an exception
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>> new methods have been added).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We would need additional release managers for each component
> >>>>>>> then.
> >>>>>>> This could all be James, but that would be unfair I guess. So, I
> >>>>>>> would propose Daniel for the projector, Stefan for the testsuite,
> >>>>>>> myself for wck, and Ingo for the client parts. James would remain
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> be the general release manager.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of course all this would be on a volunteer base and if there is
> >>>>>>> no
> >>>>>>> release manager for each sub component obviously there is no
> >>>>>>> interest for a dedicated release. For now I can only signal my
> >>>>>>> willingness to do this for WCK. I am pretty sure Daniel would for
> >>>>>>> projector.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Comments? Does this make sense? Do you people want this as well?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Oliver
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> -
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to