You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> on 2003/03/17 22:40:28 UTC
Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Compatibility
DataSource
Event
Fortress
LifeCycle
SourceResolve
Monitor
Please take the time to look at what needs to be done for these prior to
a release.
Also, that leaves for Phase III a rather large chunk:
configuration
extension
loader
naming
policy
store
thread
threadcontext
xfc
xmlutil
Now, if any of these were *already* merged into a larger context
(like Phoenix) please let me know, and we can remove the files
from Excalibur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:13, Leo Simons wrote:
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:14, Leo Simons wrote:
> >>>Compatibility
> >
> > not to mention the fact that the documentation got removed for no good
> > reason.
>
> I put docs back in. See avalon.apache.org/excalibur/compatibility :D
no you haven't. The CLI docs are still missing - they were just deleted.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
--------------------------------------------------
The fact that nobody understands you doesn't
mean you're an artist.
--------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:14, Leo Simons wrote:
>
>>>Compatibility
>
> not to mention the fact that the documentation got removed for no good reason.
I put docs back in. See avalon.apache.org/excalibur/compatibility :D
> Would it not be best to just remove it altogether and point at spice CLI?
uhm....no. Been over that, haven't we? :P
- LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
RE: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
> From: Peter Donald [mailto:peter@realityforge.org]
>
> Would it not be best to just remove it altogether and point
> at spice CLI?
We need a drop-in binary-compatible replacement. Spice CLI isn't -
different package names. Irrespective of whether we should use
Spice, Excalibur or Commons CLI in the future (and I think we
have largely settled on Commons CLI), we have to provide this.
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:14, Leo Simons wrote:
> > Compatibility
>
> Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise this looks
> to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather dumb to provide
> only the single jar.
not to mention the fact that the documentation got removed for no good reason.
Would it not be best to just remove it altogether and point at spice CLI?
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*-----------------------------------------------------*
* "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
* and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
* everyone gets busy on the proof." *
* - John Kenneth Galbraith *
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:24, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:14, Leo Simons wrote:
> >>> Compatibility
> >>
> >> Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise this
> >> looks to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather dumb to
> >> provide only the single jar.
> >
> > not to mention the fact that the documentation got removed for no
>
> good reason. Would it not be best to just remove it altogether and point
> at spice CLI?
>
> What documentation? There was nothing more than "placeholder
> documentation".
err - no there was documentation on usage.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*-------------------------------------------------*
| An eye for eye only ends up making the whole |
| world blind. - Gandhi |
*-------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:14, Leo Simons wrote:
>
>>> Compatibility
>>
>>
>> Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise this looks
>> to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather dumb to provide
>> only the single jar.
>
>
>
> not to mention the fact that the documentation got removed for no
good reason. Would it not be best to just remove it altogether and point
at spice CLI?
>
What documentation? There was nothing more than "placeholder
documentation".
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
RE: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
> From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Leo Simons
>
> > Monitor
>
> this has test failures too, which is a showstopper.
Where? I don't see any:
test:
[echo] Performing Unit Tests
[mkdir] Created dir:
C:\Home\leo\private\Apache\avalon-excalibur\monitor\bui
ld\tests
[junit] Running
org.apache.avalon.excalibur.monitor.test.DirectoryTestCase
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,675
sec
[junit] Testsuite:
org.apache.avalon.excalibur.monitor.test.DirectoryTestCas
e
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,675
sec
[junit] Testcase: testDirectoryEvents took 3,034 sec
[junit] Testcase: testDirectoryDelete took 0 sec
[junit] Running
org.apache.avalon.excalibur.monitor.test.MonitorTestCase
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,095
sec
[junit] Testsuite:
org.apache.avalon.excalibur.monitor.test.MonitorTestCase
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,095
sec
[junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
[junit] INFO 2003-03-24 10:17:01.387 [MonitorTestCase
] ():
<title>Monitor Tests</title>
[junit] <para>
[junit] This series of tests excersize the different
monitors provid
ed by
[junit] Excalibur. The configuration is specified in the
file locat
ed in
[junit]
<parameter>jakarta-avalon-excalibur/src/scratchpad/org/apach
e/avalon/excalibur/monitor/test/MonitorTest.xtext</parameter>.
[junit] You may edit the test to customize the settings.
[junit] </para>
[junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
[junit] Testcase: testActiveMonitor took 1,041 sec
[junit] Testcase: testPassiveMonitor took 1,022 sec
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>> Compatibility
>
>
>
> Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise this
looks to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather dumb to
provide only the single jar.
Honestly, this is where you, Peter and I disagree. These are all
products for which we as a community are ceasing future development.
We have MANY products under the Excalibur umbrella, and we really
need to make it easy to determine which ones we are supporting and
which ones we are not supporting. We can do that quite easily when
there is only one of those to worry about.
As for CLI test failures, we can fix those.
>> Fortress
>> LifeCycle
>
>
>
> pending resolution on the metablahblah, push these out to phase III.
Right. I will put together a new collection reflecting this.
>> Monitor
>
>
> this has test failures too, which is a showstopper.
Then let's get this fixed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
RE: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
> From: Peter Donald [mailto:peter@realityforge.org]
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:35, Leo Sutic wrote:
> > Given that the test failures are java.lang.NullPointerException, is
> > this
> >
> > something *new* caused by moving the code, or has it been like this
> > for a while?
>
> been like it for ages. May want to just copy the spice tree
> which is all good.
Isn't anymore.
Copying the spice tree seemed like the harder way out here (license blah
blah...).
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:35, Leo Sutic wrote:
> Given that the test failures are java.lang.NullPointerException, is this
>
> something *new* caused by moving the code, or has it been like this for
> a
> while?
been like it for ages. May want to just copy the spice tree which is all good.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
"Artists can color the sky red because they know it's blue. Those of us who
aren't artists must color things the way they really are or people might
think we're stupid." -- Jules Feiffer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
RE: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
> From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Leo Simons
>
> > Compatibility
>
> Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise
> this looks to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather
dumb
> to provide only the single jar.
I'll fix the CLI tests. Irrespective of whether we're moving to commons
or spice
CLI, we need a binary compatible drop-in replacement for excalibur-cli.
Given that the test failures are java.lang.NullPointerException, is this
something *new* caused by moving the code, or has it been like this for
a
while?
It seems weird.
> > Monitor
>
> this has test failures too, which is a showstopper.
Anyone? I can have a quick look at this later today.
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Projected Set of Components for Phase II
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Please take the time to look at what needs to be done for these prior
> to a release.
I'd like to point out once more that the stuff we're doing is mostly
better than excalibur-4.1. I'm all for release early, release often.
I think Steve should start checking he is happy with the manifests
sooner rather than later :D
One thing we need to do is look at version numbers. For sourceresolve
and event I believe they need to be bumped a minor version still; for
datasource probably a micro
> Compatibility
Showstopper atm is the unit tests failures for CLI. Otherwise this looks
to be just-about good enough. I still think it is rather dumb to provide
only the single jar.
> DataSource
honestly can't say. Looks like a good package :D
> Event
I don't use it (except in fortress :D), but it looks good.
> Fortress
> LifeCycle
pending resolution on the metablahblah, push these out to phase III.
> SourceResolve
again, don't use it, could do with more tests and docs, but I saw
Carsten update stuff so if he is happy with things I am too.
> Monitor
this has test failures too, which is a showstopper.
cheers!
- Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org