You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by Kev Jackson <ke...@it.fts-vn.com> on 2006/04/24 04:40:52 UTC
Ant 1.7 beta?
Hi,
Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release
schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year.
Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on
a: timing,
b: fixes/features that still need to go in before release
c: anything else
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@hpl.hp.com>.
Kev Jackson wrote:
> Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
>
>> Kev Jackson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release
>>> schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year.
>>>
>>> Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on
>>> a: timing,
>>>
>> each release requires a vote. A vote is open one week. but the next
>> issues are more important
>>
>>
>>> b: fixes/features that still need to go in before release
>>>
>> the wiki says this :
>>
>> *
>>
>> Fix for key IDE bugs (see eclipse, netbeans bugzillas) [all]
>>
>> *
>>
>> <classloader> to allow adding of jars to the current classloader
>> (would solve a /lot/ of problems at the cost of some
>> issues)[peter] (status RE "some issues" risk? -MJB)
>>
>> *
>>
>> Junit 4 integration to a level that Ant-dev and junit are happy.
>>
>> Who can take care of what here ? Which are the key IDE bugs ?
>>
>>
> I agree that this list as it stands is a little vague. Junit 4
> integration would be another case of having special code to deal with a
> Java5 environment.
>
Junit4 is special as I'm trying to set up a phone conf with the team to
discuss who owns the junit4 ant task problem. If we can have an
excellent junit4 task bundled with junit itself, I'll be happy, or we
have a separate antlib. I think the latter may be the place to start
-leave <junit> for junit3 only.
>>
>>
> I have this jar if anyone needs it (WebLogic 8.1, I also have 9 too I
> think). I agree that getting that particular jar is a pain - thankfully
> we don't have any oracle dependencies - that website always makes me
> want to kill kittens - I don't know how much user unfriendly they can be.
>
I had WL on my laptop for a while, which was an unpleasant experience.
I'd only ever install it in a new VMWare image I didnt value from now
on. Its own JRE!. It's own version of Ant! with an Ant.bat! on the path!
-steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Kev Jackson <ke...@it.fts-vn.com>.
> Its on my todo list to do full deployment from smartfrog to the
> various app servers, even though we tend to use jetty in-process for
> our day to day work. Lightweight, easily configured, self-contained.
>
I'll have to try jetty, it's been on my list of web containers to try
for donkey's years.
>
> Classic app servers were what?
> -Web front end
> -EJB hosting
> -JMS message queuing
I think that JMS may be the only part of classic j2ee that is worth
keeping - it does have a *very* good reputation amongst the financial it
set.
> -maybe JMX management
> -guis to make it easier for people to get into a non-reproducible
> configuration
>
Yes those guis are a pain - and people always fall into the trap of
using the gui to configure something, so you just end up with an test
server setup differently from the intergration server set up differently
from the production server.
> With hibernate you get good persistence without the app server,
> leaving only the web front end, management and the queue to deal with.
> That's a lot lighter wait. Oh, yes, there is that SOAP stack, but my
> own Alpine prototype does that in about 20 classes.
web front end [tomcat/jetty behind apache/lighttpd], management [shell
scripts or perl or something], pretty much everything else can be done
with Spring+Hibernate+FOSS libs. SOAP was bolted on to all the
containers years after they came out - it was never part of the original
j2ee landscape and the servers weren't designed for it.
Anyway - at least someone else understands the pain of j2ee development :)
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@apache.org>.
Kev Jackson wrote:
>>
>> I'm trying to set up a conf call with the junit team, to see how best
>> to go with the junit4 support. I am currently thinking
>> -<junit> stays 3.8.x only.
>> -we add a new junit antlib for junit4 support, design it to work on
>> 1.6.5 and 1.7
>> -maybe hand off ownership of the antlib to the junit team, if they
>> want to gain that tight coupling and take on the costs.
>>
> That sounds like a good plan - it would be much better if the JUnit
> people can support their own JUnit antlib
>
>>
>> WL itself hurts. I know people hate jboss for its worst-in-class
>> classloader, but it doesnt make such a mess of your machine. Mind you,
>> I've never tried WebSphere.
>
> Ah yes WL is one of my least favourite pieces of software - the 'hacked
> up not quite Ant' that it sticks on your path (before your current
> ANT_HOME), the 'not eclipse' IDE (WL Workshop) - great let's strip out
> the good features of eclipse (refactoring support, CVS/SVN support) and
> leave you with a bloated IDE that only works with WL, the jrocket vm -
> which doesn't like code compiled with the Sun JDK, but interestingly has
> no problems with code compiled with Jikes. A whole host of wizzy gui
> configurators/installers, but the shell scripts are placed in different
> location depending on linux/windows. And a hot-deploy mode that doesn't
> work (unless you use the web application / server admin tool to deploy)
> - which defeats the point of the 'special' bundled Ant, or the supplied
> shell scripts.
1.if you install it on a vmware image (Solaris?) it wont make a mess of
your dev box.
2. cargo from codehaus.org should do deployment too.
Its on my todo list to do full deployment from smartfrog to the various
app servers, even though we tend to use jetty in-process for our day to
day work. Lightweight, easily configured, self-contained.
>
> I've used a very old version of WebSphere (3.5) and it sucked, given the
> time WL 8+ has had since 2000 (when I used that bug-ridden steaming pile
> of <expletive deleted>), and coming from a completely different company,
> I hoped for something much better - but no it sucked too, but in a
> different way. I'm not sure, but I suspect that all J2EE appservers
> suck, I just haven't had the misfortune to try them all (yet).
Classic app servers were what?
-Web front end
-EJB hosting
-JMS message queuing
-maybe JMX management
-guis to make it easier for people to get into a non-reproducible
configuration
With hibernate you get good persistence without the app server, leaving
only the web front end, management and the queue to deal with. That's a
lot lighter wait. Oh, yes, there is that SOAP stack, but my own Alpine
prototype does that in about 20 classes.
-steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Kev Jackson <ke...@it.fts-vn.com>.
>
> I'm trying to set up a conf call with the junit team, to see how best
> to go with the junit4 support. I am currently thinking
> -<junit> stays 3.8.x only.
> -we add a new junit antlib for junit4 support, design it to work on
> 1.6.5 and 1.7
> -maybe hand off ownership of the antlib to the junit team, if they
> want to gain that tight coupling and take on the costs.
>
That sounds like a good plan - it would be much better if the JUnit
people can support their own JUnit antlib
>
> WL itself hurts. I know people hate jboss for its worst-in-class
> classloader, but it doesnt make such a mess of your machine. Mind you,
> I've never tried WebSphere.
Ah yes WL is one of my least favourite pieces of software - the 'hacked
up not quite Ant' that it sticks on your path (before your current
ANT_HOME), the 'not eclipse' IDE (WL Workshop) - great let's strip out
the good features of eclipse (refactoring support, CVS/SVN support) and
leave you with a bloated IDE that only works with WL, the jrocket vm -
which doesn't like code compiled with the Sun JDK, but interestingly has
no problems with code compiled with Jikes. A whole host of wizzy gui
configurators/installers, but the shell scripts are placed in different
location depending on linux/windows. And a hot-deploy mode that doesn't
work (unless you use the web application / server admin tool to deploy)
- which defeats the point of the 'special' bundled Ant, or the supplied
shell scripts.
I've used a very old version of WebSphere (3.5) and it sucked, given the
time WL 8+ has had since 2000 (when I used that bug-ridden steaming pile
of <expletive deleted>), and coming from a completely different company,
I hoped for something much better - but no it sucked too, but in a
different way. I'm not sure, but I suspect that all J2EE appservers
suck, I just haven't had the misfortune to try them all (yet).
(sorry had to rant about WL, two projects using it back-to-back and it
doesn't do anything for me - tomcat + spring or apache + rails would be
much better for both projects)
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@apache.org>.
( I just replied using the wrong from: address, so it probably wont go
through. lets try again)
Kev Jackson wrote:
>> <classloader> to allow adding of jars to the current classloader
>> (would solve a /lot/ of problems at the cost of some
>> issues)[peter] (status RE "some issues" risk? -MJB)
Primarily, it can cause fun with IDEs.
>>
>> *
>>
>> Junit 4 integration to a level that Ant-dev and junit are happy.
>>
>> Who can take care of what here ? Which are the key IDE bugs ?
>>
>>
> I agree that this list as it stands is a little vague. Junit 4
> integration would be another case of having special code to deal with a
> Java5 environment.
I'm trying to set up a conf call with the junit team, to see how best to
go with the junit4 support. I am currently thinking
-<junit> stays 3.8.x only.
-we add a new junit antlib for junit4 support, design it to work on
1.6.5 and 1.7
-maybe hand off ownership of the antlib to the junit team, if they want
to gain that tight coupling and take on the costs.
> >
> So as part of the release target, openpgp is used to sign the archives
> created - sounds good to me
Apache now requires signing by someone whose keys are cross
authenticated. We also need to push out beta JARs to the cvs.apache.org
maven1 repository, final ones to the big maven1/maven2 repo, with
half-decent .pom files. I can take ownership of creating all those pom
files if nobody else wants to take it on, as I use them a lot @work
(with ant, naturally)
>
>> - release instructions
>> the release instructions need to be updated for subversion. I never
>> created branches in subversion ...
>>
>>
>>
> Branching in svn is pretty easy, but as far as I know, svn does a lazy
> copy - ie it doesn't copy files over to the branch until there's a
> change recorded - just something to be aware of
>
>> - branches
>> we will need to decide if we will want to branch ant, and if yes when.
>> Experience from the 1.6 time showed that during a long time we did
>> double maintenance of 1.6 branch and HEAD.
>> We might want to delay the creation of a 1.7 branch until there is a say
>> at least 1.7.1 ...
>>
>> - antlibs
>> do we want to release antunit, dotnet and svn antlibs at the same time ?
>> or parallel ?
>> Should each antlib be in principle like an independent project and have
>> its own release instructions ?
>>
>>
>>
> Since 1.7 is the first version to properly support antlibs, wouldn't it
> make sense to release the first batch of ant libs at the same time, but
> then after to have them on their own release schedules?
Seems good.
>
>> - dependencies of ant
>> we have removed from the build 4 external jars which were not to be
>> found anymore anywhere. Still, gathering the dependencies is a problem
>> for the release manager.
>> For instance to get the weblogic.jar I downloaded an eval version of
>> weblogic. (Lengthy process involving registration ...).
>>
>>
>>
> I have this jar if anyone needs it (WebLogic 8.1, I also have 9 too I
> think). I agree that getting that particular jar is a pain - thankfully
> we don't have any oracle dependencies - that website always makes me
> want to kill kittens - I don't know how much user unfriendly they can be.
>
WL itself hurts. I know people hate jboss for its worst-in-class
classloader, but it doesnt make such a mess of your machine. Mind you,
I've never tried WebSphere.
> Kev
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Kev Jackson <ke...@it.fts-vn.com>.
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
>Kev Jackson wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release
>>schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year.
>>
>>Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on
>>a: timing,
>>
>>
>each release requires a vote. A vote is open one week. but the next
>issues are more important
>
>
>>b: fixes/features that still need to go in before release
>>
>>
>the wiki says this :
>
> *
>
> Fix for key IDE bugs (see eclipse, netbeans bugzillas) [all]
>
> *
>
> <classloader> to allow adding of jars to the current classloader
> (would solve a /lot/ of problems at the cost of some
> issues)[peter] (status RE "some issues" risk? -MJB)
>
> *
>
> Junit 4 integration to a level that Ant-dev and junit are happy.
>
>Who can take care of what here ? Which are the key IDE bugs ?
>
>
I agree that this list as it stands is a little vague. Junit 4
integration would be another case of having special code to deal with a
Java5 environment.
>>c: anything else
>>
>>
>>
>I see issues/questions/improvement points concerning the release process
>
>Some points spring to my mind :
>
>- signing of zips, tgzs, ...
>I did this manually for 1.6.x. Stefan Bodewig had informed us of the
>development of the openpgp module of jakarta commons [2].
>We should check if this works for us and somehow bundle this in the build.
>
>
>
So as part of the release target, openpgp is used to sign the archives
created - sounds good to me
>- release instructions
>the release instructions need to be updated for subversion. I never
>created branches in subversion ...
>
>
>
Branching in svn is pretty easy, but as far as I know, svn does a lazy
copy - ie it doesn't copy files over to the branch until there's a
change recorded - just something to be aware of
>- branches
>we will need to decide if we will want to branch ant, and if yes when.
>Experience from the 1.6 time showed that during a long time we did
>double maintenance of 1.6 branch and HEAD.
>We might want to delay the creation of a 1.7 branch until there is a say
>at least 1.7.1 ...
>
>- antlibs
>do we want to release antunit, dotnet and svn antlibs at the same time ?
>or parallel ?
>Should each antlib be in principle like an independent project and have
>its own release instructions ?
>
>
>
Since 1.7 is the first version to properly support antlibs, wouldn't it
make sense to release the first batch of ant libs at the same time, but
then after to have them on their own release schedules?
>- dependencies of ant
>we have removed from the build 4 external jars which were not to be
>found anymore anywhere. Still, gathering the dependencies is a problem
>for the release manager.
>For instance to get the weblogic.jar I downloaded an eval version of
>weblogic. (Lengthy process involving registration ...).
>
>
>
I have this jar if anyone needs it (WebLogic 8.1, I also have 9 too I
think). I agree that getting that particular jar is a pain - thankfully
we don't have any oracle dependencies - that website always makes me
want to kill kittens - I don't know how much user unfriendly they can be.
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Ant 1.7 beta?
Posted by Antoine Levy-Lambert <an...@gmx.de>.
Kev Jackson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release
> schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year.
>
> Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on
> a: timing,
each release requires a vote. A vote is open one week. but the next
issues are more important
>
> b: fixes/features that still need to go in before release
the wiki says this :
*
Fix for key IDE bugs (see eclipse, netbeans bugzillas) [all]
*
<classloader> to allow adding of jars to the current classloader
(would solve a /lot/ of problems at the cost of some
issues)[peter] (status RE "some issues" risk? -MJB)
*
Junit 4 integration to a level that Ant-dev and junit are happy.
Who can take care of what here ? Which are the key IDE bugs ?
> c: anything else
>
I see issues/questions/improvement points concerning the release process
Some points spring to my mind :
- signing of zips, tgzs, ...
I did this manually for 1.6.x. Stefan Bodewig had informed us of the
development of the openpgp module of jakarta commons [2].
We should check if this works for us and somehow bundle this in the build.
- release instructions
the release instructions need to be updated for subversion. I never
created branches in subversion ...
- branches
we will need to decide if we will want to branch ant, and if yes when.
Experience from the 1.6 time showed that during a long time we did
double maintenance of 1.6 branch and HEAD.
We might want to delay the creation of a 1.7 branch until there is a say
at least 1.7.1 ...
- antlibs
do we want to release antunit, dotnet and svn antlibs at the same time ?
or parallel ?
Should each antlib be in principle like an independent project and have
its own release instructions ?
- dependencies of ant
we have removed from the build 4 external jars which were not to be
found anymore anywhere. Still, gathering the dependencies is a problem
for the release manager.
For instance to get the weblogic.jar I downloaded an eval version of
weblogic. (Lengthy process involving registration ...).
> Kev
>
>
>
>
Antoine
[1] [WWW] http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28228
[2] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/sandbox/openpgp/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org