[vote] gbuild subproject

[David Blevins <da...@visi.com>]

Seems like everyone likes the idea, so let me recap into an actual  
vote thread and just take the liberty of moving the +1s in.

+1s Jeff, Bruce, Matt, David J, Dain, John
0s Alan
No -1s so far.

Going to throw myself into the +1 group.

-David

[result] Re: [vote] gbuild subproject

[David Blevins <da...@visi.com>]

One zero, no negative votes, an unofficial plus one in the form of  
"Works for me" from Aaron, and nine plus ones.

+1 Jeff, Bruce, Matt, David J, Dain, John, David B, Geir, Jacek

0 Alan

   For archival purposes, see original discussion thread:
   Subject: "gbuild subproject?" Message-Id: <A1E9686D-4CA1-4490-AC92- 
D540BCAE26EE@visi.com>

It's official!

-- 
David

Re: [vote] gbuild subproject

[David Blevins <da...@visi.com>]

On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:32 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> <aside>
> next time, can you put the old subject in the subject like "[vote]  
> foo (was :  what do you thing about foo?)" as I think this will be  
> a confusing thing in mail archives later...
> </aside>
>

Will do.

> I do think it's a great idea to have a place for Geronimo-centric  
> build scripts and related documentation.  And a subproject is fine,  
> because I think of that as a way of neatly organizing the project  
> to make it easy for people to find things, and for us to manage  
> things.
>
> But I don't really understand what gbuild is yet.  Is this really  
> Geronimo-centered, or broader with Geronimo as a piece?

Pretty much what you describe above.  A very generic, Geronimo- 
centric, build/test initiative.  The idea is still pretty soft and  
what we do in it is really up to us.  No master plan other than  
building/testing has been a bane on the project since day one and  
this is an attempt to get a lot of momentum behind solving that  
problem in a community-lead fashion.

I'm really excited to see where we can take it and what we can make  
from it all.

> Was there any thought given to Ken's suggestion of working with  
> Gump since they do similar things?

I'm personally happy to work with anyone.  We are working really  
closely with Continuum already.

> If this is appropriate for G, I have no problem with a subproject,  
> and hope you can answer the question above.
>
> +1
>

Great!

Thanks,
David


>
>
> On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:36 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>
>
>> Seems like everyone likes the idea, so let me recap into an actual  
>> vote thread and just take the liberty of moving the +1s in.
>>
>> +1s Jeff, Bruce, Matt, David J, Dain, John
>> 0s Alan
>> No -1s so far.
>>
>> Going to throw myself into the +1 group.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>

Re: [vote] gbuild subproject

[Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>]

On 11/1/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> But I don't really understand what gbuild is yet.  Is this really
> Geronimo-centered, or broader with Geronimo as a piece?  Was there
> any thought given to Ken's suggestion of working with Gump since they
> do similar things?

Just on this - its quite a different problem space to gump. I'm not
sure about the current development, but the existing gump doesn't do
distributed builds, and is more of a massive integration test than a
continuous build tool.

It's certainly worth keeping in mind for the future as it develops,
but at least in my experience with Gump I don't notice any points of
collaboration yet. That said - it wouldn't hurt to bounce the message
over to the general@gump.apache.org list as an FYI.

Another note: as more projects start to depend on Geronimo libraries
(especially specs), it will be more important for them to be included
in Gump (I think some of them already are, but not all).

BTW, I think this gbuild setup is a great thing for Geronimo and
related projects, and also great feedback for the Maven project and
Continuum - I look forward to working with you and seeing what can
come out of it.

Cheers,
Brett

Re: [vote] gbuild subproject

["Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>]

<aside>
next time, can you put the old subject in the subject like "[vote]  
foo (was :  what do you thing about foo?)" as I think this will be a  
confusing thing in mail archives later...
</aside>

I do think it's a great idea to have a place for Geronimo-centric  
build scripts and related documentation.  And a subproject is fine,  
because I think of that as a way of neatly organizing the project to  
make it easy for people to find things, and for us to manage things.

But I don't really understand what gbuild is yet.  Is this really  
Geronimo-centered, or broader with Geronimo as a piece?  Was there  
any thought given to Ken's suggestion of working with Gump since they  
do similar things?

If this is appropriate for G, I have no problem with a subproject,  
and hope you can answer the question above.

+1

geir



On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:36 AM, David Blevins wrote:

> Seems like everyone likes the idea, so let me recap into an actual  
> vote thread and just take the liberty of moving the +1s in.
>
> +1s Jeff, Bruce, Matt, David J, Dain, John
> 0s Alan
> No -1s so far.
>
> Going to throw myself into the +1 group.
>
> -David
>

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org