You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@buildr.apache.org by Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com> on 2008/04/28 19:47:34 UTC
[RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Vote passed with +7 (+6 PPMC) and no -1.
Assaf
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com> wrote:
> Up for vote, the much-anticipated Buildr 1.3 release, our first official
> Apache release.
> We're voting to make a release based on the source distribution, available
> as both Zip and Tarball, here:
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
>
> Specifically:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.tgz
>
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.zip
>
>
> That source distribution was used to generate two Gem packages, for Ruby
> 1.8.6 and JRuby 1.1, available here:
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
>
> The documentation generated for this release is available here:
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/buildr.pdf
>
> The official specification against which this release was tested:
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/specs.html
>
> Assaf
>
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com>.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Any word on when this will be available on the RubyForge mirrors?
We're waiting for the PPMC vote to be tallied on Thursday, so hopefully
Friday.
Assaf
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
> Assaf Arkin wrote:
> >
> > Vote passed with +7 (+6 PPMC) and no -1.
> > Assaf
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Up for vote, the much-anticipated Buildr 1.3 release, our first official
> >> Apache release.
> >> We're voting to make a release based on the source distribution,
> >> available
> >> as both Zip and Tarball, here:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
> >>
> >> Specifically:
> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.tgz
> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.zip
> >>
> >>
> >> That source distribution was used to generate two Gem packages, for Ruby
> >> 1.8.6 and JRuby 1.1, available here:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
> >>
> >> The documentation generated for this release is available here:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/
> >> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/buildr.pdf
> >>
> >> The official specification against which this release was tested:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/specs.html
> >>
> >> Assaf
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16974800.html
> Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
CTO, Intalio
http://www.intalio.com
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>.
Any word on when this will be available on the RubyForge mirrors?
Daniel
Assaf Arkin wrote:
>
> Vote passed with +7 (+6 PPMC) and no -1.
> Assaf
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com> wrote:
>
>> Up for vote, the much-anticipated Buildr 1.3 release, our first official
>> Apache release.
>> We're voting to make a release based on the source distribution,
>> available
>> as both Zip and Tarball, here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.tgz
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/buildr-1.3.0-incubating.zip
>>
>>
>> That source distribution was used to generate two Gem packages, for Ruby
>> 1.8.6 and JRuby 1.1, available here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/distro/
>>
>> The documentation generated for this release is available here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/buildr.pdf
>>
>> The official specification against which this release was tested:
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/specs.html
>>
>> Assaf
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16974800.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>.
n8han wrote:
>
>
> Daniel Spiewak wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p16988713/buildfile buildfile
>>
>
> Oh my. I was going to offer to produce a dummy jar for databinder-parent
> but it's only one out of six. Still though, if that works it's much
> shorter than naming all the transitive deps.
>
> Nathan
>
Yeah, it's a bit rum. I can deal with it in the short-term, but obviously
if it's still not working to produce an Eclipse project then we have more
serious issues. :-)
Daniel
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16990526.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by n8han <na...@technically.us>.
Daniel Spiewak wrote:
>
> ...
> http://www.nabble.com/file/p16988713/buildfile buildfile
>
Oh my. I was going to offer to produce a dummy jar for databinder-parent but
it's only one out of six. Still though, if that works it's much shorter than
naming all the transitive deps.
Nathan
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16990475.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>.
Ok, that seemed to have resolved the POM-only problem (sort of, it's still a
pain). However, it still refuses to generate an eclipse project file. I'm
attaching (or trying anyway) a buildfile which does this for me. Basically,
buildr just silently refuses to generate the metadata:
C:\Users\Daniel Spiewak\Development\workspace\TestApp>buildr eclipse
(in C:/Users/Daniel Spiewak/Development/workspace/TestApp, development)
Completed in 1.071s
C:\Users\Daniel Spiewak\Development\workspace\TestApp>
Daniel Spiewak wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's because my test case doesn't include the repo1 repository.
> I'll try the artifact enhancer thingy. Thanks!
>
> Daniel
>
>
> Assaf Arkin wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It's not that the POM is missing, it's that there's no JAR which
>>> corresponds
>>> to the POM. This is less often a case of broken deployment (though that
>>> does happen) and more usually where a large project with complicated
>>> dependencies tries to simplify their deployment by building a
>>> "super-package" which depends upon everything below it. In short, it's
>>> a
>>> package which exists solely for the purpose of transitive dependencies.
>>> In
>>> my test case, the super-package is ``databinder-parent``. I don't
>>> remember
>>> what the artifact name is for the Hibernate super-package.
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding your notes in the troubleshooting doc, but it
>>> looks like that just fixes the problems with missing POM. Is there any
>>> way
>>> to work around the non-JAR? (since it isn't really missing)
>>
>>
>> Same thing, enhance the artifact to create a fake (empty) zip:
>>
>> artifact 'example:com:jar:1.0' do |task|
>> mkpath File.dirname(task.to_s)
>> Zip::ZipOutputStream.open task.to_s
>> end
>>
>>
>> When I run this test, I get an error like this:
>>
>> Failed to download org.apache.wicket:wicket:pom:1.3.2, tried the
>> following
>> repositories:
>> http://databinder.net/repo/
>>
>> Assaf
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>> Assaf Arkin wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-63
>>> >>
>>> >> Might want to hold off on that release. It seems that the bug with
>>> >> POM-only
>>> >> projects still hasn't been fixed. Since there are a large number of
>>> >> projects (including Hibernate) which make use of this to aggregate
>>> >> transitive dependencies, this really isn't something which can be
>>> ignored
>>> >> for 1.3 unless we're giving up on the idea of stable transitive
>>> >> dependencies
>>> >> in this release.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I have some ideas on how to do transitive dependencies right, but
>>> those
>>> > will
>>> > have to wait for after the 1.3. It's a pretty big deal and something
>>> I'd
>>> > like to see as the main focus for 1.4 (along with version matching and
>>> > OSGi
>>> > support).
>>> >
>>> > The transitive method is still marked as experimental, it's supposed
>>> to
>>> > carry us until we get real transitive support, so it should be fixed
>>> but
>>> > can't hold the release.
>>> >
>>> > The quick workaround until we get to test and fix it, is to fake the
>>> > missing
>>> > artifact/POM:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/troubleshooting.html#missing_pom_breaks_transitive_dependencies
>>> >
>>> > Assaf
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Daniel
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16976533.html
>>> Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> CTO, Intalio
>> http://www.intalio.com
>>
>>
>
>
http://www.nabble.com/file/p16988713/buildfile buildfile
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16988713.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, that's because my test case doesn't include the repo1 repository. I'll
try the artifact enhancer thingy. Thanks!
Daniel
Assaf Arkin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> It's not that the POM is missing, it's that there's no JAR which
>> corresponds
>> to the POM. This is less often a case of broken deployment (though that
>> does happen) and more usually where a large project with complicated
>> dependencies tries to simplify their deployment by building a
>> "super-package" which depends upon everything below it. In short, it's a
>> package which exists solely for the purpose of transitive dependencies.
>> In
>> my test case, the super-package is ``databinder-parent``. I don't
>> remember
>> what the artifact name is for the Hibernate super-package.
>>
>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding your notes in the troubleshooting doc, but it
>> looks like that just fixes the problems with missing POM. Is there any
>> way
>> to work around the non-JAR? (since it isn't really missing)
>
>
> Same thing, enhance the artifact to create a fake (empty) zip:
>
> artifact 'example:com:jar:1.0' do |task|
> mkpath File.dirname(task.to_s)
> Zip::ZipOutputStream.open task.to_s
> end
>
>
> When I run this test, I get an error like this:
>
> Failed to download org.apache.wicket:wicket:pom:1.3.2, tried the following
> repositories:
> http://databinder.net/repo/
>
> Assaf
>
>
>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> Assaf Arkin wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-63
>> >>
>> >> Might want to hold off on that release. It seems that the bug with
>> >> POM-only
>> >> projects still hasn't been fixed. Since there are a large number of
>> >> projects (including Hibernate) which make use of this to aggregate
>> >> transitive dependencies, this really isn't something which can be
>> ignored
>> >> for 1.3 unless we're giving up on the idea of stable transitive
>> >> dependencies
>> >> in this release.
>> >
>> >
>> > I have some ideas on how to do transitive dependencies right, but those
>> > will
>> > have to wait for after the 1.3. It's a pretty big deal and something
>> I'd
>> > like to see as the main focus for 1.4 (along with version matching and
>> > OSGi
>> > support).
>> >
>> > The transitive method is still marked as experimental, it's supposed to
>> > carry us until we get real transitive support, so it should be fixed
>> but
>> > can't hold the release.
>> >
>> > The quick workaround until we get to test and fix it, is to fake the
>> > missing
>> > artifact/POM:
>> >
>> >
>> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/troubleshooting.html#missing_pom_breaks_transitive_dependencies
>> >
>> > Assaf
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Daniel
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16976533.html
>> Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> CTO, Intalio
> http://www.intalio.com
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16987500.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com>.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> It's not that the POM is missing, it's that there's no JAR which
> corresponds
> to the POM. This is less often a case of broken deployment (though that
> does happen) and more usually where a large project with complicated
> dependencies tries to simplify their deployment by building a
> "super-package" which depends upon everything below it. In short, it's a
> package which exists solely for the purpose of transitive dependencies. In
> my test case, the super-package is ``databinder-parent``. I don't remember
> what the artifact name is for the Hibernate super-package.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding your notes in the troubleshooting doc, but it
> looks like that just fixes the problems with missing POM. Is there any way
> to work around the non-JAR? (since it isn't really missing)
Same thing, enhance the artifact to create a fake (empty) zip:
artifact 'example:com:jar:1.0' do |task|
mkpath File.dirname(task.to_s)
Zip::ZipOutputStream.open task.to_s
end
When I run this test, I get an error like this:
Failed to download org.apache.wicket:wicket:pom:1.3.2, tried the following
repositories:
http://databinder.net/repo/
Assaf
>
> Daniel
>
>
> Assaf Arkin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-63
> >>
> >> Might want to hold off on that release. It seems that the bug with
> >> POM-only
> >> projects still hasn't been fixed. Since there are a large number of
> >> projects (including Hibernate) which make use of this to aggregate
> >> transitive dependencies, this really isn't something which can be
> ignored
> >> for 1.3 unless we're giving up on the idea of stable transitive
> >> dependencies
> >> in this release.
> >
> >
> > I have some ideas on how to do transitive dependencies right, but those
> > will
> > have to wait for after the 1.3. It's a pretty big deal and something I'd
> > like to see as the main focus for 1.4 (along with version matching and
> > OSGi
> > support).
> >
> > The transitive method is still marked as experimental, it's supposed to
> > carry us until we get real transitive support, so it should be fixed but
> > can't hold the release.
> >
> > The quick workaround until we get to test and fix it, is to fake the
> > missing
> > artifact/POM:
> >
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/troubleshooting.html#missing_pom_breaks_transitive_dependencies
> >
> > Assaf
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16976533.html
> Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
CTO, Intalio
http://www.intalio.com
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE]: Buildr 1.3 release
Posted by Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>.
It's not that the POM is missing, it's that there's no JAR which corresponds
to the POM. This is less often a case of broken deployment (though that
does happen) and more usually where a large project with complicated
dependencies tries to simplify their deployment by building a
"super-package" which depends upon everything below it. In short, it's a
package which exists solely for the purpose of transitive dependencies. In
my test case, the super-package is ``databinder-parent``. I don't remember
what the artifact name is for the Hibernate super-package.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your notes in the troubleshooting doc, but it
looks like that just fixes the problems with missing POM. Is there any way
to work around the non-JAR? (since it isn't really missing)
Daniel
Assaf Arkin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Daniel Spiewak <dj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-63
>>
>> Might want to hold off on that release. It seems that the bug with
>> POM-only
>> projects still hasn't been fixed. Since there are a large number of
>> projects (including Hibernate) which make use of this to aggregate
>> transitive dependencies, this really isn't something which can be ignored
>> for 1.3 unless we're giving up on the idea of stable transitive
>> dependencies
>> in this release.
>
>
> I have some ideas on how to do transitive dependencies right, but those
> will
> have to wait for after the 1.3. It's a pretty big deal and something I'd
> like to see as the main focus for 1.4 (along with version matching and
> OSGi
> support).
>
> The transitive method is still marked as experimental, it's supposed to
> carry us until we get real transitive support, so it should be fixed but
> can't hold the release.
>
> The quick workaround until we get to test and fix it, is to fake the
> missing
> artifact/POM:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~assaf/buildr/1.3.0/site/troubleshooting.html#missing_pom_breaks_transitive_dependencies
>
> Assaf
>
>
>>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RESULT---VOTE-%3A-Buildr-1.3-release-tp16944355p16976533.html
Sent from the Buildr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.