You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lenya.apache.org by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org> on 2006/06/26 10:26:44 UTC
Don't ship Ant task class files (was: anttasks build problem is back)
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
[...]
> btw, why do we ship class files in svn? most projects i know have the
> rule not to include generated files in their repositories, and i think
> that makes sense.
+1
What do the others think?
-- Andreas
--
Andreas Hartmann
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
andreas.hartmann@wyona.com andreas@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Hamish Cunningham escribió:
>> I think a lot of open source project ship ANT files, because of the
>> difficulty of setting things up to work with default installations. Our
>> GATE system does this (http://gate.ac.uk/).
> Hi Hamish,
>
> It's not about the ant build.xml. It's more about special ant task
> shipped in source and compiled form. Basically, if we are going to run
> java for whatever reasons, the source ant task (written in java) can
> be compiled before called. This is the way how is done in cocoon.
btw, this was the case for Lenya as well, but at this time these
anttasks were part of the source and not part of the tools.
So I think it's very important for people here to understand what the
"tools" mean and secondly you might want to ask
the person who moved this from source to tools what the reason for
moving was ...
Michi
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
+41 44 272 91 61
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Hamish Cunningham escribió:
> I think a lot of open source project ship ANT files, because of the
> difficulty of setting things up to work with default installations. Our
> GATE system does this (http://gate.ac.uk/).
Hi Hamish,
It's not about the ant build.xml. It's more about special ant task
shipped in source and compiled form. Basically, if we are going to run
java for whatever reasons, the source ant task (written in java) can be
compiled before called. This is the way how is done in cocoon.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
>
> I don't think its an issue worth spending much time/effort on?
>
> Just my 0.00002 euros...
>
> Best,
>
> Hamish
>
> --
> Dr. Hamish Cunningham
> Senior Research Scientist
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Sheffield
> Regent Court
> 211 Portobello St.
> Sheffield S1 4DP
> United Kingdom
> http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~hamish/
>
>
>
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>> Jörn Nettingsmeier escribió:
>>
>>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>>>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>>>
>>>
>>> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
>>
>> I agree. We don't have to store into the repository pre-compiled
>> lenya ant task classes.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Antonio Gallardo.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Hamish Cunningham wrote:
> I think a lot of open source project ship ANT files, because of the
> difficulty of setting things up to work with default installations. Our
> GATE system does this (http://gate.ac.uk/).
>
> I don't think its an issue worth spending much time/effort on?
agreed, whereas I have to admit that we need to think about something to
solve the Java 1.5 - 1.4 backwards compatibility issue.
Michi
>
> Just my 0.00002 euros...
>
> Best,
>
> Hamish
>
> --
> Dr. Hamish Cunningham
> Senior Research Scientist
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Sheffield
> Regent Court
> 211 Portobello St.
> Sheffield S1 4DP
> United Kingdom
> http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~hamish/
>
>
>
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>
>> Jörn Nettingsmeier escribió:
>>
>>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>>>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
>>
>>
>> I agree. We don't have to store into the repository pre-compiled
>> lenya ant task classes.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Antonio Gallardo.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>>
>>
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
+41 44 272 91 61
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Hamish Cunningham <ha...@dcs.shef.ac.uk>.
I think a lot of open source project ship ANT files, because of the
difficulty of setting things up to work with default installations. Our
GATE system does this (http://gate.ac.uk/).
I don't think its an issue worth spending much time/effort on?
Just my 0.00002 euros...
Best,
Hamish
--
Dr. Hamish Cunningham
Senior Research Scientist
Department of Computer Science
University of Sheffield
Regent Court
211 Portobello St.
Sheffield S1 4DP
United Kingdom
http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~hamish/
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Jörn Nettingsmeier escribió:
>
>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>
>>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>>
>>>
>>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>>
>>
>> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
>
> I agree. We don't have to store into the repository pre-compiled lenya
> ant task classes.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
>
>
--
Hamish
http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~hamish/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Jörn Nettingsmeier escribió:
> Michael Wechner wrote:
>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>
>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>
> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
I agree. We don't have to store into the repository pre-compiled lenya
ant task classes.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>
> the tree is broken every other day because of this
why is it broken because of this? Why do people delete classes
within the tools directory and rebuild them everday?
Michi
> and needs manual intervention that is currently undocumented except in
> one message by renaud. that is enough of a problem to re-evaluate things.
>
>
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
+41 44 272 91 61
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Jörn Nettingsmeier <po...@uni-duisburg.de>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>
>> Michael Wechner wrote:
>>
>>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>>>
>>>
>>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>>
>>
>> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
>>
>> in the c world, it would in fact be totally inconceivable to have the
>> make and autotools binaries in a cvs. (although in tarballs it's
>> common to include auto*-generated scripts as a courtesy to users -
>> that's fine by me.)
>>
>> i'm sure you have very good reasons for shipping ant,
>
>
> the reason for shipping ant is to simplify the installement.
> It would be very silly to make it complicated again, which
> would mean
>
> - Remove ant
> - Remove jetty
> - Remove the config classes
>
> and as an alternative add a very complicated INSTALL.txt
>
> Would you really want that?
no, and i have said so. you are ignoring the part of my message where i
acknowlege that there can be good reasons for shipping generated files
sometimes:
>> but that should be an exception and ease-of-use hack, not an argument
>> for binaries in a svn tree. i'm not even sure i like the abundance of
>> jar files, but i must confess having all those as svn externals would
>> become unwieldy. it's a trade-off.
>>
>> in any case, building those ant tasks takes only a few seconds and
>> requires no configuration, i.e. it can't possibly go wrong.
>> and having as few generated files as possible in the repo is certainly
>> a good idea.
>
>
> as said these files were once built on the fly, but then somebody moved
> them
> into the tools dir. You might want to check why these files were moved
> in the first place ...
>
>>
>>> not if they are considered tools, whereas I agree that one should
>>> separate the build process from the build process
>>> of the tools. See for instance the tools/config.
>>>
>>> Can we please put back these classes such that Lenya can be built
>>> again with Java 1.4?
>>
>>
>> if i understand the issue correctly, the classes are there, but
>> whenever some committer with java 1.5 commits and forgets to exclude
>> them, they will be in a bytecode version that is not
>> backwards-compatible to 1.4.
>
>
> Lenya is currently targeting Java 1.4 and NOT 1.5. At the same time 1.4
> is compatible with 1.5, but not necessarily the other way around. So,
> what's the problem?!
the problem is (as you have found out yourself) that the tree is easily
broken when committers use java 1.5.
while it makes sense to stay 1.4 compatible for the foreseeable future,
it's certainly not wise to make life unnecessarily hard for developers
who want to use 1.5 (because lenya needs testing on that platform).
thus, in this particular and well defined case, generated files do more
harm than good, hence, let's get rid of them.
in the general case, it is always wise to think twice before adding
generated files to a repository. as you have stated, sometimes, even
after thinking twice, one arrives at the decision to do it :-D
and that's fine. but it's not an all-or-nothing decision.
>> and that is definitely a strong argument towards getting rid of those
>> class files. all we need to do is add compile-build-tasks to the "all"
>> target. there doesn't even have to be an extra build step for trunk
>> users.
>
>
> as said, then theses classes need to be moved from tools to the source.
> This might make sense, but I don't see an urgent reason for this to happen
> and I think we should put our resources into other things.
the tree is broken every other day because of this and needs manual
intervention that is currently undocumented except in one message by
renaud. that is enough of a problem to re-evaluate things.
--
"Open source takes the bullshit out of software."
- Charles Ferguson on TechnologyReview.com
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier, EDV-Administrator
Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Standort Duisburg
Mail: pol-admin@uni-due.de, Telefon: 0203/379-2736
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> Michael Wechner wrote:
>
>> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>
>>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>>>
>>
>> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship
>> Lenya with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>
>
> ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
>
> in the c world, it would in fact be totally inconceivable to have the
> make and autotools binaries in a cvs. (although in tarballs it's
> common to include auto*-generated scripts as a courtesy to users -
> that's fine by me.)
>
> i'm sure you have very good reasons for shipping ant,
the reason for shipping ant is to simplify the installement.
It would be very silly to make it complicated again, which
would mean
- Remove ant
- Remove jetty
- Remove the config classes
and as an alternative add a very complicated INSTALL.txt
Would you really want that?
> but that should be an exception and ease-of-use hack, not an argument
> for binaries in a svn tree. i'm not even sure i like the abundance of
> jar files, but i must confess having all those as svn externals would
> become unwieldy. it's a trade-off.
>
> in any case, building those ant tasks takes only a few seconds and
> requires no configuration, i.e. it can't possibly go wrong.
> and having as few generated files as possible in the repo is certainly
> a good idea.
as said these files were once built on the fly, but then somebody moved them
into the tools dir. You might want to check why these files were moved
in the first place ...
>
>> not if they are considered tools, whereas I agree that one should
>> separate the build process from the build process
>> of the tools. See for instance the tools/config.
>>
>> Can we please put back these classes such that Lenya can be built
>> again with Java 1.4?
>
>
> if i understand the issue correctly, the classes are there, but
> whenever some committer with java 1.5 commits and forgets to exclude
> them, they will be in a bytecode version that is not
> backwards-compatible to 1.4.
Lenya is currently targeting Java 1.4 and NOT 1.5. At the same time 1.4
is compatible with 1.5, but not necessarily the other way around. So,
what's the problem?!
>
> and that is definitely a strong argument towards getting rid of those
> class files. all we need to do is add compile-build-tasks to the "all"
> target. there doesn't even have to be an extra build step for trunk
> users.
as said, then theses classes need to be moved from tools to the source.
This might make sense, but I don't see an urgent reason for this to happen
and I think we should put our resources into other things.
Michi
>
>
> jörn
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
+41 44 272 91 61
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Jörn Nettingsmeier <po...@uni-duisburg.de>.
Michael Wechner wrote:
> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
>
> because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship Lenya
> with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
ok, that's an argument, but it gets absurd pretty quick.
in the c world, it would in fact be totally inconceivable to have the
make and autotools binaries in a cvs. (although in tarballs it's common
to include auto*-generated scripts as a courtesy to users - that's fine
by me.)
i'm sure you have very good reasons for shipping ant, but that should be
an exception and ease-of-use hack, not an argument for binaries in a svn
tree. i'm not even sure i like the abundance of jar files, but i must
confess having all those as svn externals would become unwieldy. it's a
trade-off.
in any case, building those ant tasks takes only a few seconds and
requires no configuration, i.e. it can't possibly go wrong.
and having as few generated files as possible in the repo is certainly a
good idea.
> not if they are considered tools, whereas I agree that one should
> separate the build process from the build process
> of the tools. See for instance the tools/config.
>
> Can we please put back these classes such that Lenya can be built again
> with Java 1.4?
if i understand the issue correctly, the classes are there, but whenever
some committer with java 1.5 commits and forgets to exclude them, they
will be in a bytecode version that is not backwards-compatible to 1.4.
and that is definitely a strong argument towards getting rid of those
class files. all we need to do is add compile-build-tasks to the "all"
target. there doesn't even have to be an extra build step for trunk users.
jörn
--
"Open source takes the bullshit out of software."
- Charles Ferguson on TechnologyReview.com
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier, EDV-Administrator
Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Standort Duisburg
Mail: pol-admin@uni-due.de, Telefon: 0203/379-2736
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: Don't ship Ant task class files
Posted by Michael Wechner <mi...@wyona.com>.
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> btw, why do we ship class files in svn?
because these classes are considered as tools. Do you want to ship Lenya
with the ant java sources and first build ant?!
>> most projects i know have the rule not to include generated files in
>> their repositories, and i think that makes sense.
not if they are considered tools, whereas I agree that one should
separate the build process from the build process
of the tools. See for instance the tools/config.
Can we please put back these classes such that Lenya can be built again
with Java 1.4?
Thanks
Michi
>
> +1
>
> What do the others think?
>
> -- Andreas
>
>
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@wyona.com michi@apache.org
+41 44 272 91 61
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org