You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Sam Ruby <ru...@us.ibm.com> on 2001/02/12 03:49:12 UTC
[GUMP] Any James developers here?
It looks like Avalon has been steadily deprecating interfaces that James
has been depending on. Now James is broken.
http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-02-11/james.html
Who wants to volunteer to look into it?
Standard reason: if one wants to deploy a server solution involving
multiple Apache Jakarta subprojects, each of which depend on different
point in time snapshots of Avalon, which version of the avalonapi.jar
should one put into the classpath first?
- Sam Ruby
P.S. Kudos to the Avalon team for deprecating interfaces.
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>.
At 09:27 12/2/01 +0000, Charles Benett wrote:
>>
>> http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-02-11/james.html
>
>Strange, it wasn't a couple of days ago. And deprecating interfaces
>shouldn't break a build.
I think it got too many deprecation messages and busted the compiler/ant.
Will have a look at it when I get the chance.
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "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 |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
> on 2/18/01 12:27 AM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>
>> That's fine with me.
>>
>> so let's ge for
>>
>> jakarta-avalon
>> jakarta-avalon-phoenix
>> jakarta-avalon-cornerstone
>>
>> Is it ok with everybody?
>>
>> Fede
>
> +1
>
> (going round and round and round...)
Yeah, and it seems not enough... What are the other two modules that
suddently appeared on the CVS? jakarta-avalon-logkit and
jakarta-avalon-testlet ????
They also have wrong permissions, along with the main jakarta-avalon
repository... WAAARRRRGGGGHGHHHH!!
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier Fumagalli <http://www.betaversion.org/> <ma...@betaversion.org>
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 2/18/01 12:27 AM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> That's fine with me.
>
> so let's ge for
>
> jakarta-avalon
> jakarta-avalon-phoenix
> jakarta-avalon-cornerstone
>
> Is it ok with everybody?
>
> Fede
+1
(going round and round and round...)
-jon
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Federico Barbieri <sc...@betaversion.org>.
Jon Stevens wrote:
>
> on 2/14/01 2:38 PM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>
> >> Ok, so can we agree on this:
> >>
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-foo
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-bar
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-whatever
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-peter
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-federico
> >> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-yourmother
> >>
> >> ?
> >>
> >
> > You're missing my point...
> > org.apache.avalon and the kernel and blocks implementation are two
> > different project. Very different. The avalon package's goal is to
> > create a set of design patterns, contracts and interfaces to enforce
> > good software design, runtime code reusing, IOC, SOC, etc. Phoenix is an
> > intergation framework. Cornerstone is a set of default services for
> > Phoenix.
> >
> > avalon is way much closer in the way it should be developed, goals and
> > needs to the jakarta-util project rather than Phoenix. I whould strongly
> > agree to have that code into the util project.
> > Many avalon patterns are used by Phoenix, James, Cocoon and similar
> > concepts are in Turbine too. So it should be in a common
> > project/repository, not duplicated in each project.
> >
> > So what about merging avalon into the jakarta util and let Phoenix and
> > Cornerstone live together in a separate CVS?
> >
> > Fede
>
> And you are missing my point.
>
> I don't care how many different CVS trees there are. Just prefix them with
> "jakarta-avalon" if it is at all Avalon related. If it is related to another
> project that you would like to create, then you need to propose that as
> another project, not just another CVS tree.
>
> -jon
>
That's fine with me.
so let's ge for
jakarta-avalon
jakarta-avalon-phoenix
jakarta-avalon-cornerstone
Is it ok with everybody?
Fede
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 2/14/01 2:38 PM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>> Ok, so can we agree on this:
>>
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-foo
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-bar
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-whatever
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-peter
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-federico
>> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-yourmother
>>
>> ?
>>
>
> You're missing my point...
> org.apache.avalon and the kernel and blocks implementation are two
> different project. Very different. The avalon package's goal is to
> create a set of design patterns, contracts and interfaces to enforce
> good software design, runtime code reusing, IOC, SOC, etc. Phoenix is an
> intergation framework. Cornerstone is a set of default services for
> Phoenix.
>
> avalon is way much closer in the way it should be developed, goals and
> needs to the jakarta-util project rather than Phoenix. I whould strongly
> agree to have that code into the util project.
> Many avalon patterns are used by Phoenix, James, Cocoon and similar
> concepts are in Turbine too. So it should be in a common
> project/repository, not duplicated in each project.
>
> So what about merging avalon into the jakarta util and let Phoenix and
> Cornerstone live together in a separate CVS?
>
> Fede
And you are missing my point.
I don't care how many different CVS trees there are. Just prefix them with
"jakarta-avalon" if it is at all Avalon related. If it is related to another
project that you would like to create, then you need to propose that as
another project, not just another CVS tree.
-jon
--
If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
<http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/> && <http://java.apache.org/turbine/>
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Federico Barbieri <sc...@betaversion.org>.
Jon Stevens wrote:
>
> on 2/12/01 1:33 PM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>
> > That's exactly why I want to split java.apache.avalon into three CVS!
> >
> > API (design patterns, interfaces, contracts etc. have a very different
> > lifecycle from the framework implementation and it's critical to the
> > health of projects depending on those API to have two development
> > pipeline separated.
> >
> > Most of the org.apache.avalon package is quite stable... it's been
> > stable for more than one year! What keeps changing is the kernel
> > implementation (Phoenix) on wich dependencies are weeker.
>
> Ok, so can we agree on this:
>
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-foo
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-bar
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-whatever
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-peter
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-federico
> /home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-yourmother
>
> ?
>
You're missing my point...
org.apache.avalon and the kernel and blocks implementation are two
different project. Very different. The avalon package's goal is to
create a set of design patterns, contracts and interfaces to enforce
good software design, runtime code reusing, IOC, SOC, etc. Phoenix is an
intergation framework. Cornerstone is a set of default services for
Phoenix.
avalon is way much closer in the way it should be developed, goals and
needs to the jakarta-util project rather than Phoenix. I whould strongly
agree to have that code into the util project.
Many avalon patterns are used by Phoenix, James, Cocoon and similar
concepts are in Turbine too. So it should be in a common
project/repository, not duplicated in each project.
So what about merging avalon into the jakarta util and let Phoenix and
Cornerstone live together in a separate CVS?
Fede
> -jon
>
> --
> If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
> your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
> <http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/> && <http://java.apache.org/turbine/>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 2/12/01 1:33 PM, "Federico Barbieri" <sc...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> That's exactly why I want to split java.apache.avalon into three CVS!
>
> API (design patterns, interfaces, contracts etc. have a very different
> lifecycle from the framework implementation and it's critical to the
> health of projects depending on those API to have two development
> pipeline separated.
>
> Most of the org.apache.avalon package is quite stable... it's been
> stable for more than one year! What keeps changing is the kernel
> implementation (Phoenix) on wich dependencies are weeker.
Ok, so can we agree on this:
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-foo
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-bar
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-whatever
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-peter
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-federico
/home/cvs/jakarta-avalon-yourmother
?
-jon
--
If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
<http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/> && <http://java.apache.org/turbine/>
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Federico Barbieri <sc...@betaversion.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> It looks like Avalon has been steadily deprecating interfaces that James
> has been depending on. Now James is broken.
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-02-11/james.html
>
> Who wants to volunteer to look into it?
>
> Standard reason: if one wants to deploy a server solution involving
> multiple Apache Jakarta subprojects, each of which depend on different
> point in time snapshots of Avalon, which version of the avalonapi.jar
> should one put into the classpath first?
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
That's exactly why I want to split java.apache.avalon into three CVS!
API (design patterns, interfaces, contracts etc. have a very different
lifecycle from the framework implementation and it's critical to the
health of projects depending on those API to have two development
pipeline separated.
Most of the org.apache.avalon package is quite stable... it's been
stable for more than one year! What keeps changing is the kernel
implementation (Phoenix) on wich dependencies are weeker.
> P.S. Kudos to the Avalon team for deprecating interfaces.
>
Federico
Re: [GUMP] Any James developers here?
Posted by Charles Benett <Ch...@benett1.demon.co.uk>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> It looks like Avalon has been steadily deprecating interfaces that James
> has been depending on.
These interfaces and classes were only deprecated between Avalon 3.0a4
and Avalon 3.1a1.
> Now James is broken.
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-02-11/james.html
Strange, it wasn't a couple of days ago. And deprecating interfaces
shouldn't break a build.
> Who wants to volunteer to look into it?
When i get a chance. Can you be more specific as to what is broken?
>
> Standard reason: if one wants to deploy a server solution involving
> multiple Apache Jakarta subprojects, each of which depend on different
> point in time snapshots of Avalon, which version of the avalonapi.jar
> should one put into the classpath first?
I'm not sure you can yet, because the packages keep changing.
BTW, what are gump and tinderbox? Do they have any web docs?
Charles Benett