You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com> on 2005/01/17 07:28:00 UTC
Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
know if you'd prefer something different.
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.
Thanks guys for all of your hard work on the reorganization. I can
tell you from the occassional contributor's point of view, this will
definitely be easier to get around! The old hands will probably like
it too!
sean
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 06:21:16 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> I was a bit disappointed last night while testing the Maven command
> to generate an Ant build.xml.
>
> There were no hard coded paths (as you've experienced), but the
> particular plugin that generates the build.xml is not as mature
> (wrt multiproject builds) as I had assumed.
>
> No worries, I will put together a build that does (from current/apps)
> everything that "maven apps:build-all" does from the same location.
>
> Note that maven target "apps:build-all" will probably change
> shortly. It will probably end up as "dist" to align with our
> Ant build. In core, build.xml will simply call apps/build.xml
> with the same arguments, and apps/build.xml will (partly) take
> over the job that build-webapps.xml used to have.
>
> Current/apps is progressing quite nicely right now. I'm still
> consolidating a few sets of duplicate code (partly due to my own
> svn-newbie-ness and partly due to us actually _having_ duplicate
> code out there).
>
> I've also moved the tiles stuff to tiles.
>
> There's still a lot of work to do to get us back to a clean distribution,
> but I'm enjoying it so far. I've got a lot on my todo list.
>
> Stay tuned for more...
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> EdgeTech, Inc.
> 678.910.8017
> AIM: jmitchtx
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig McClanahan" <cr...@gmail.com>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 1:28 AM
> Subject: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
>
> > I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
> > Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
> > problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
> > on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
> > Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
> > the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
> > now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
> > to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
> > substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
> >
> > I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
> > still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
> > know if you'd prefer something different.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:24:23 -0800, Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:11:13 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd like to do just one source distro, though, that has all the
> > subprojects in it. Stripping out the JAR files that were incorrectly
> > included in last night's build will get the size back to reasonable.
> > Does this sound agreeable?
>
> Are you thinking that this would be just a part of the nightly build
> process, rather than something an uber-build would do (thus avoiding
> the uber-build again)?
Yes, that's what I was thinking ... indeed, that's the way it is
working right now.
> That would also be fine with me. At some point,
> though, I do want to get the nightly builds running on ASF hardware.
> (Yeah, I know, I've been saying that for ages and haven't done
> anything about it. But I will one day. Really. ;)
>
Cool :-).
> --
> Martin Cooper
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
What resources do we have available for this?
I would assume all we need is:
a) some disk space (looks like plenty)
b) nightly job to kick it off (or do we do this as part of Gump builds?)
c) rights to invoke ant
d) rights to invoke maven
e) rights to push the artifacts to a published location (which most
committers have)
Did I miss anything?
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
To: <cr...@apache.org>
Cc: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:11:13 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:05:30 -0800, Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
>> > should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
>> > another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
>> > pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
>> >
>> > However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
>> > (1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
>> > convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
>> > subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
>> > uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
>> > the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
>>
>> We could also just have the nightly build script create a binary for
>> each of the top level subprojects, and skip having an uber-build at
>> all. Then, we'd just need a build at the top of each subproject's
>> tree, and most of them have one already.
>
> That would be fine with me.
>
>> I'd like to do just one source distro, though, that has all the
>> subprojects in it. Stripping out the JAR files that were incorrectly
>> included in last night's build will get the size back to reasonable.
>> Does this sound agreeable?
>
> Are you thinking that this would be just a part of the nightly build
> process, rather than something an uber-build would do (thus avoiding
> the uber-build again)? That would also be fine with me. At some point,
> though, I do want to get the nightly builds running on ASF hardware.
> (Yeah, I know, I've been saying that for ages and haven't done
> anything about it. But I will one day. Really. ;)
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Martin Cooper
>> >
>>
>> Craig
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:11:13 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:05:30 -0800, Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
> > should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
> > another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
> > pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
> >
> > However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
> > (1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
> > convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
> > subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
> > uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
> > the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
>
> We could also just have the nightly build script create a binary for
> each of the top level subprojects, and skip having an uber-build at
> all. Then, we'd just need a build at the top of each subproject's
> tree, and most of them have one already.
That would be fine with me.
> I'd like to do just one source distro, though, that has all the
> subprojects in it. Stripping out the JAR files that were incorrectly
> included in last night's build will get the size back to reasonable.
> Does this sound agreeable?
Are you thinking that this would be just a part of the nightly build
process, rather than something an uber-build would do (thus avoiding
the uber-build again)? That would also be fine with me. At some point,
though, I do want to get the nightly builds running on ASF hardware.
(Yeah, I know, I've been saying that for ages and haven't done
anything about it. But I will one day. Really. ;)
--
Martin Cooper
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
>
> Craig
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:05:30 -0800, Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
> should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
> another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
> pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
>
> However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
> (1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
> convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
> subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
> uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
> the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
We could also just have the nightly build script create a binary for
each of the top level subprojects, and skip having an uber-build at
all. Then, we'd just need a build at the top of each subproject's
tree, and most of them have one already.
I'd like to do just one source distro, though, that has all the
subprojects in it. Stripping out the JAR files that were incorrectly
included in last night's build will get the size back to reasonable.
Does this sound agreeable?
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:10:57 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one,
> > should be kept very simple.
>
> Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the
> other docs together?
I believe we decided that that would come out of a 'site'
pseudo-subproject. I still think that's the right place for it.
--
Martin Cooper
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> EdgeTech, Inc.
> 678.910.8017
> AIM: jmitchtx
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
>
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 06:21:16 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >> I was a bit disappointed last night while testing the Maven command
> >> to generate an Ant build.xml.
> >>
> >> There were no hard coded paths (as you've experienced), but the
> >> particular plugin that generates the build.xml is not as mature
> >> (wrt multiproject builds) as I had assumed.
> >>
> >> No worries, I will put together a build that does (from current/apps)
> >> everything that "maven apps:build-all" does from the same location.
> >>
> >> Note that maven target "apps:build-all" will probably change
> >> shortly. It will probably end up as "dist" to align with our
> >> Ant build. In core, build.xml will simply call apps/build.xml
> >> with the same arguments, and apps/build.xml will (partly) take
> >> over the job that build-webapps.xml used to have.
> >
> > We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
> > should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
> > another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
> > pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
> >
> > However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
> > (1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
> > convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
> > subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
> > uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
> > the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> >> Current/apps is progressing quite nicely right now. I'm still
> >> consolidating a few sets of duplicate code (partly due to my own
> >> svn-newbie-ness and partly due to us actually _having_ duplicate
> >> code out there).
> >>
> >> I've also moved the tiles stuff to tiles.
> >>
> >> There's still a lot of work to do to get us back to a clean distribution,
> >> but I'm enjoying it so far. I've got a lot on my todo list.
> >>
> >> Stay tuned for more...
> >>
> >> --
> >> James Mitchell
> >> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> >> EdgeTech, Inc.
> >> 678.910.8017
> >> AIM: jmitchtx
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Craig McClanahan" <cr...@gmail.com>
> >> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> >> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 1:28 AM
> >> Subject: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
> >>
> >> > I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
> >> > Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
> >> > problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
> >> > on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
> >> > Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
> >> > the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
> >> > now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
> >> > to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
> >> > substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
> >> >
> >> > I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
> >> > still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
> >> > know if you'd prefer something different.
> >> >
> >> > Craig
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
> I'd also like to see us move to a model where we check in the site(s)
> so that updating the live site is simply an 'svn up'.
It would be nice if this could be done daily with the distribution.
Perhaps a postGoal to the build.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
To: <cr...@apache.org>
Cc: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:17:33 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:10:57 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one,
>> > > should be kept very simple.
>> >
>> > Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the
>> > other docs together?
>> >
>>
>> Isn't building the site still the same as the result of building
>> "apps/documentation"? If so, that could be uploaded as a separate
>> artifact so it wouldn't have to be combined into the artifact for the
>> core library.
>
> What I would like to see is each subproject having its own docs, and
> 'site' having the glue that pulls the others together.
>
> I'd also like to see us move to a model where we check in the site(s)
> so that updating the live site is simply an 'svn up'. (I know the
> infra@ folks would like to see this too.) This would allow for
> automated site refreshes, eliminating the (funky, IMHO) current
> mechanism of uploading a war and logging on to explode it in place.
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
>> >
>> > --
>> > James Mitchell
>>
>> Craig
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:17:33 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:10:57 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one,
> > > should be kept very simple.
> >
> > Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the
> > other docs together?
> >
>
> Isn't building the site still the same as the result of building
> "apps/documentation"? If so, that could be uploaded as a separate
> artifact so it wouldn't have to be combined into the artifact for the
> core library.
What I would like to see is each subproject having its own docs, and
'site' having the glue that pulls the others together.
I'd also like to see us move to a model where we check in the site(s)
so that updating the live site is simply an 'svn up'. (I know the
infra@ folks would like to see this too.) This would allow for
automated site refreshes, eliminating the (funky, IMHO) current
mechanism of uploading a war and logging on to explode it in place.
--
Martin Cooper
> >
> > --
> > James Mitchell
>
> Craig
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:10:57 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one,
> > should be kept very simple.
>
> Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the
> other docs together?
>
Isn't building the site still the same as the result of building
"apps/documentation"? If so, that could be uploaded as a separate
artifact so it wouldn't have to be combined into the artifact for the
core library.
>
> --
> James Mitchell
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
> For these reasons, I think the uber-build, if we have one,
> should be kept very simple.
Would the uber-build also generate the global 'site' that glues all the
other docs together?
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 06:21:16 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>> I was a bit disappointed last night while testing the Maven command
>> to generate an Ant build.xml.
>>
>> There were no hard coded paths (as you've experienced), but the
>> particular plugin that generates the build.xml is not as mature
>> (wrt multiproject builds) as I had assumed.
>>
>> No worries, I will put together a build that does (from current/apps)
>> everything that "maven apps:build-all" does from the same location.
>>
>> Note that maven target "apps:build-all" will probably change
>> shortly. It will probably end up as "dist" to align with our
>> Ant build. In core, build.xml will simply call apps/build.xml
>> with the same arguments, and apps/build.xml will (partly) take
>> over the job that build-webapps.xml used to have.
>
> We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
> should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
> another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
> pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
>
> However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
> (1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
> convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
> subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
> uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
> the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
>> Current/apps is progressing quite nicely right now. I'm still
>> consolidating a few sets of duplicate code (partly due to my own
>> svn-newbie-ness and partly due to us actually _having_ duplicate
>> code out there).
>>
>> I've also moved the tiles stuff to tiles.
>>
>> There's still a lot of work to do to get us back to a clean distribution,
>> but I'm enjoying it so far. I've got a lot on my todo list.
>>
>> Stay tuned for more...
>>
>> --
>> James Mitchell
>> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
>> EdgeTech, Inc.
>> 678.910.8017
>> AIM: jmitchtx
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Craig McClanahan" <cr...@gmail.com>
>> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
>> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 1:28 AM
>> Subject: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
>>
>> > I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
>> > Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
>> > problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
>> > on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
>> > Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
>> > the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
>> > now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
>> > to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
>> > substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
>> >
>> > I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
>> > still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
>> > know if you'd prefer something different.
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 06:21:16 -0500, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> I was a bit disappointed last night while testing the Maven command
> to generate an Ant build.xml.
>
> There were no hard coded paths (as you've experienced), but the
> particular plugin that generates the build.xml is not as mature
> (wrt multiproject builds) as I had assumed.
>
> No worries, I will put together a build that does (from current/apps)
> everything that "maven apps:build-all" does from the same location.
>
> Note that maven target "apps:build-all" will probably change
> shortly. It will probably end up as "dist" to align with our
> Ant build. In core, build.xml will simply call apps/build.xml
> with the same arguments, and apps/build.xml will (partly) take
> over the job that build-webapps.xml used to have.
We don't want 'core' building stuff in 'apps'. The 'core' subproject
should not know about any other subprojects. As we discussed on
another thread, any uber-build stuff we have should live in a 'build'
pseudo-subproject, so that it's not part of any individual subproject.
However, note that such an uber-build would serve only two purposes:
(1) to make the nightly builds slightly simpler; (2) for the
convenience of developers wanting to build everything. Since the
subprojects will be independently released, we will not need an
uber-build to handle the release process. For these reasons, I think
the uber-build, if we have one, should be kept very simple.
--
Martin Cooper
> Current/apps is progressing quite nicely right now. I'm still
> consolidating a few sets of duplicate code (partly due to my own
> svn-newbie-ness and partly due to us actually _having_ duplicate
> code out there).
>
> I've also moved the tiles stuff to tiles.
>
> There's still a lot of work to do to get us back to a clean distribution,
> but I'm enjoying it so far. I've got a lot on my todo list.
>
> Stay tuned for more...
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
> EdgeTech, Inc.
> 678.910.8017
> AIM: jmitchtx
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig McClanahan" <cr...@gmail.com>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 1:28 AM
> Subject: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
>
> > I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
> > Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
> > problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
> > on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
> > Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
> > the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
> > now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
> > to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
> > substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
> >
> > I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
> > still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
> > know if you'd prefer something different.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
I was a bit disappointed last night while testing the Maven command
to generate an Ant build.xml.
There were no hard coded paths (as you've experienced), but the
particular plugin that generates the build.xml is not as mature
(wrt multiproject builds) as I had assumed.
No worries, I will put together a build that does (from current/apps)
everything that "maven apps:build-all" does from the same location.
Note that maven target "apps:build-all" will probably change
shortly. It will probably end up as "dist" to align with our
Ant build. In core, build.xml will simply call apps/build.xml
with the same arguments, and apps/build.xml will (partly) take
over the job that build-webapps.xml used to have.
Current/apps is progressing quite nicely right now. I'm still
consolidating a few sets of duplicate code (partly due to my own
svn-newbie-ness and partly due to us actually _having_ duplicate
code out there).
I've also moved the tiles stuff to tiles.
There's still a lot of work to do to get us back to a clean distribution,
but I'm enjoying it so far. I've got a lot on my todo list.
Stay tuned for more...
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
EdgeTech, Inc.
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig McClanahan" <cr...@gmail.com>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 1:28 AM
Subject: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
> I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
> Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
> problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
> on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
> Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
> the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
> now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
> to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
> substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
>
> I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
> still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
> know if you'd prefer something different.
>
> Craig
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Adjustments to Struts Nightly Builds
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:28:00 -0800, Craig McClanahan <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've adjusted the scripts for the Struts nightly builds to use
> Martin's new "current" pseudo-project (thanks Martin!), to minimize
> problems in the face of all the restructuring that is currently going
> on. As a side effect of this change, the source distribution for
> Struts will now contain all the sources in "current", instead of just
> the "core/trunk" part we used to get. This seems to make more sense
> now that it's necessary to cross over all these subprojects in order
> to get a nightly binary. However, the source distro is now
> substantially bigger (22mb versus 7.6mb).
>
> I'm also assuming that running "ant clean dist" in the "core" trunk is
> still the right command to build the nightly binary releases. Let me
> know if you'd prefer something different.
Until we have an uber-build outside of 'core', that's probably right.
At some point, though, the build in 'core' will build only 'core', and
the nightly builds will want to use the uber-build instead. But we're
not there yet...
--
Martin Cooper
> Craig
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org