Looks nice, however I have ran into two issues: 1. Couldn't proceed with protobuf source generation on my Windows machine withou source changes - I created a pull request with proposed change 2. The sources generated with protobuf did not compile - complained about missing class Parser: d symbol [ERROR] symbol : class Parser [ERROR] location: package com.google.protobuf [ERROR] C:\wave\proto\target\generated-sources\org\waveprotocol\box\common\comms\WaveClientRpc.java:[6495,30] cannot fin d symbol
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > Very good. Will do. > > On 6/2/13 4:49 AM, "Paulo Pires" <pjpi...@ubiwhere.com> wrote: > > >The merge is done. Would be great if people could take a look and > >double-check it at https://github.com/pires/wave. > > > >Michael, thanks for your support. Perhaps a good start would be to > >continue the package/module renaming and revisit the open issues. > > > >Cheers, > >PP > > > >Em 2013-06-01 23:32, Michael MacFadden escreveu: > >> Another benefit of maven is that it can automate some of the release > >> processes in terms of generating the tar-ball and tagging SVN. > >> > >> On 5/31/13 3:17 PM, "Angus Turner" <angusisf...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>>Hi Paulo, > >>>I want to thank you for all your hard work on getting this done. Once > >>>you've gotten all the changes synced up, it'd be good to get a diff > >>> on > >>>reviewboard so comments can be made. Obviously this is too late for > >>> our > >>>first release, but it'd be great to get it ready for next release. > >>> > >>>Anything that makes the codebase easier to understand and follow is a > >>> big > >>>+1 from me > >>> > >>>Thanks > >>>Angus Turner > >>>angusisf...@gmail.com > >>> > >>> > >>>On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Paulo Pires <pjpi...@ubiwhere.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Page where Maven module structure is discussed can be found at > >>>> https://github.com/pires/wave/wiki/WiaB-Maven-Module-Organization > >>>> > >>>> On May 31, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Paulo Pires <pjpi...@ubiwhere.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > Hi all, > >>>> > > >>>> > Right now, I have this https://github.com/pires/wave > >>>> > > >>>> > I'll be merging latest changes during the day, but this is enough > >>>> for > >>>> you to fiddle with. > >>>> > > >>>> > Also, I had only one issue with JDK7, that I eventually fixed in > >>>> > >>>> > https://github.com/pires/wave/commit/34e44e1dfb0ac6e7820f4d4b71fe05837e > >>>>fe > >>>>d960 > >>>> > > >>>> > Cheers, > >>>> > PP > >>>> > > >>>> > On May 30, 2013, at 7:12 PM, Dave <w...@glark.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >> On 30/05/13 18:45, Michael MacFadden wrote: > >>>> >>> If we have some interests, I would be more than happy to > >>>> re-engage > >>>> with PP > >>>> >>> and get that maven transition done. While it's not a huge step > >>>> I > >>>> think it > >>>> >>> will entice developers. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> My experience has been that Maven can be a bit of a Marmite > >>>>transition > >>>> - some people love it, some people hate it. Personally, I'm quite > >>>> fond > >>>>of > >>>> Maven, but I've certainly never been put off using or contributing > >>>> to a > >>>> project because it uses ant. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> However clearer structure & modularising the codebase is > >>>> something > >>>>that > >>>> I'm sure everyone would support, whatever build framework we use. > >>>> With > >>>>our > >>>> limited resources, would it be wise to focus on these initially? > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I don't really have a say in the matter, but while I'd be quite > >>>> happy > >>>> to see a transition to Maven, I'm not sure it's a particularly > >>>> pressing > >>>> issue for the project at the moment. Sort of organising the > >>>> deckchairs > >>>>on > >>>> the titanic? ;-) > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Dave > >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> > > > >-- > >Paulo Pires > >Ubiwhere > > >
