Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > I just worry that announcements of the 'future potential problems' > could be misleading to a new user who is looking at Velocity to > see if its worth investing some time to experiment with.If they > think it's 'broken' because of a gump message, then people would > be getting the wrong impression. Simple fix: keep it working! ;-) I just checked, and was surprised to see that the velocity messages had my name on it. I thought having automated e-mails for velocity was on request of Jon, and my convention was to make Jon appear as the sender of the ones he requested. In any case, if the consensus is that these e-mails aren't wanted, or if there are suggestions as to what the subject line or content of the e-mails should look like, please let me know. (BTW - Jon doesn't believe that I should give projects an opportunity to opt out; I don't think any project will. Perhaps velocity will surprise me, but I think not). > Not everyone (including me) understands exactly what Gump is testing > (does it do full dependency analysis? Does gump bootstrap itself > with a fresh nightly snapshot of the tools it uses ? ) so at least if > Gump could qualify the problem as either 'something wrong now' or > ' you might have a problem later because...' it would be even more > valuable. Gump, as a tool, will simply check out a series of cvs repositories, set up the classpath, and invoke Ant. Gump, as the set of data definitions I have been using, will completely bootstrap itself nightly with almost everything - including Ant - that I know how to build. There are a number of jars that I don't know how to build (many from Sun) that I simply point to. I had expected there to be a demand for other configurations (such as the ones that you are suggesting), and expected that there would be other people stepping up and trying out those configurations. Everything, including the script that sends out the e-mails and the list of projects for which there are automated e-mails, is checked into cvs at http://jakarta.apache.org/cvsweb/index.cgi/jakarta-alexandria/proposal/gump/ > Did you see what he did? He rjust emoved the offending ant task, > and was a little surprised : he stated it worked fine using the > ant that we choose to include with Velocity. I was referring to a different problem. Perhaps it was introduced and fixed without your even knowing it? ;-) Had to do with default configurations being merged with the properties instead of the properties overriding, and other areas of the code not being able to handle multi-valued properties gracefully. > What would be nice is a 'Gump server' somewhere - so I can give it > an email address and tell it to gump the vel CVS in a way that I > specify - give a list of build targets or something.... then it > could test in an independent way and email me the message... Sounds like a great idea, when will it be available? ;-) - Sam Ruby
