On Mon, 2002-07-08 at 21:02, Daniel Rall wrote: > Haven't tried this week Dion, but last week I built beta 4 from source > and it would not process the xdocs (`ant -debug` showed an error in > Maven, which I reported to jvz). Either the POM or Maven build files > for Turbine are not in sync with beta 4. Usually my response is to > "just fix it," but I will not make the time commitment to maintain the > integration of yet another package which is in a state of flux.
Bob just added a switch to Maven to allow the selection of a project descriptor with a -f so I will stick in a b5 descriptor and you can try with HEAD if you like. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > Dan, > > > > you could always stick with b4 for the time being... > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/08/2002 07:05:31 PM: > > > >> Martin Poeschl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > i'm not sure what the timeframe for a 3.0 release is .. there are some > >> > users who don't want to use any packages marked as alpha or beta .. i > >> > think we must shorten our release cycles!! > >> > >> I am willing to help out with a real beta release of 3.0, based on > >> either Fulcrum or an Avalon container. Is there a Turbine 3.0 TODO > >> list enumerating the minimal requirements for such a release > >> milestone? If not, is there any preference for where I should put it > >> in the jakarta-turbine-3 CVS repository? > >> > >> An important part of any release is well organized documentation. > >> Previous releases of Turbine contained quite a bit of documentation, > >> but these hidden jewels were sequestered in the far recesses of the > >> jungle which was the Turbine 2.x web site, accessible only to those > >> with native guide and elephant, or to those brave souls stout enough > >> of heart to wade through the piranha infested waters of the source. > >> > >> Maven's XML descriptor and sharp DVSL machete promises to bring order > >> to our chaotic jungle, tempting us with a slick hierarchical layout. > >> But alas, its shaky rope bridge of stability has washed away every > >> time I've returned to ford the river of a build. The tease of web > >> site coherency is frustrating, to say the least. A stable build > >> system is without a doubt a Turbine release prerequisite. Seeing as > >> how Maven originally emerged from the Turbine jungle to statisfy > >> Turbine requirements, what are the chances that beta 5 approximates > >> release candidate quality, satisfying this most basic of requirements? > >> If this is an unrealistic expectation, is there any expected time > >> frame for a Jelly-based release candidate of Maven? If so, how does > >> this schedule compare with the T3 TODO list? > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
