activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Pollack <Mark.Poll...@springsource.com>
Subject RE: NMS 1.1.0 RC1 Available
Date Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:56:13 GMT
Hi Jim,

I ran into the same issue with over running the date from the 'true' inception date of the
project, so I artificially kept the start date low enough so that it wouldn't overrun.  I've
found having the version number in there helps greatly in debugging user issues so I'd err
to have less accurate days since inception as a trade off to have more accurate and easy reporting
of framework version number.

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Gomes [mailto:e.semog@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 1:32 AM
To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: NMS 1.1.0 RC1 Available

Thanks for the great feedback.  I have incorporated the following changes:


   1. The package files are now down to two files: a bin and a src ZIP file
   (along with the attending .asc files).
   2. I added a modified version of the script proposed by Mark.  Using the
   strategy of embedding the framework version quickly over-ran the allowable
   range for the revision number.  I instead adopted the use of the number of
   days since inception strategy.  This will give a unique daily build number,
   which should be sufficient.

I will place the new build files out tomorrow.  It may be late in the day,
since I need my work build machine to generate the build, but I can't access
the remote server from work.  I am having to split my efforts between two
locations, which is cumbersome.  I hope to streamline this.  I will send out
another announcement when it's done.

Please feel free to offer more comments and suggestions.

- Jim


On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Mark Pollack <Mark.Pollack@springsource.com
> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Another suggestion, the RC1 as well as the dlls that I've used from svn all
> have the identical assembly version, 1.1.0.0.  Can the assembly revision be
> unique for each build/release.  This makes it hard to identify version
> issue, both with what .NET framework is in use and what exact version is
> being used, svn snapshot vs. RC1, vs. GA release.
>
>
> There are several strategies here.  Sometimes people coerce the svn version
> number into the assembly - though there is less range available in the
> assembly numbers.
>
> I've used the following scheme in spring.net which you may find useful
>
> Major.minor.patch - as you would normally, for example 1.1.1
>
> And the assembly revision is calculated according to the scheme:
>
> RRXXX where RR = framework number (1.0=10; 1.1=11; 2.0=20, 3.0=30, 3.5=35,
> etc.) and
> XXX is the number of days from the year the project 'started', property
> project.year.
>
>
>
> The following snippit in from NAnt will do this for you...
>
>    <target name="generate-build-number">
>
>    <script language="C#">
>        <imports>
>            <import namespace="System.Globalization" />
>            <import namespace="System.Threading" />
>        </imports>
>
>        <code>
>        <!-- format for assembly revision is RRXXX where RR = framework
> number (1.0=10; 1.1=11; 2.0=20, 3.0=30, 3.5=35, etc.) and
>             XXX is the number of days from the year the project 'started',
> property project.year.  -->
>            <![CDATA[
>                public static void ScriptMain(Project project) {
>
>
>                    string frameworkRevisionNumber =
> project.Properties["nant.settings.currentframework.revisionnumber"];
>                    int startYear =
> Convert.ToInt32(project.Properties["project.year"]);
>                    DateTime start = new DateTime(startYear, 1, 1);
>                    TimeSpan ts = DateTime.Now - start;
>                    int days = ts.Days;
>                    string version =
> project.Properties["package.version"].ToString() + "." +
> frameworkRevisionNumber + days.ToString();
>                    project.Properties["project.version.numeric"] =
> version.ToString();
>
>                }
>            ]]>
>        </code>
>
>    </script>
>    </target>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothy Bish [mailto:tabish121@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 10:53 AM
> To: dev@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: Re: NMS 1.1.0 RC1 Available
>
> On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 07:15 -0700, Jim Gomes wrote:
> > ***** ANNOUNCEMENT *****
> >
> > The Apache NMS 1.1.0 Release Candidate 1 is now available at the
> following
> > location:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~jgomes/nms_1.1.0<http://people.apache.org/%7Ejgomes/nms_1.1.0>
> >
> > The following projects are included:
> >
> > Apache.NMS
> > Apache.NMS.ActiveMQ
> > Apache.NMS.EMS
> > Apache.NMS.MSMQ
> > Apache.NMS.WCF
> >
> > There are release binaries and debug binaries (with PDBs) provided.  The
> > binary ZIP files include pre-built assemblies for all of the platforms
> that
> > are supported by each project (e.g., .NET 2.0, Mono, .NET 3.5, etc).  Not
> > all projects support all platforms.  Please note that in order to use the
> > Apache.NMS.EMS project files, you will need to provide your own copy of
> the
> > TIBCO.EMS.dll, as this is a licensed 3rd Party application.
> >
> > Please report any issues or problems you have with these files.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jim Gomes
>
> Nice work Jim.
>
> There certainly are a lot of Zip files, do you think perhaps it would
> make sense to package all this as one archive for each of the projects,
> or a source and binary for each?
>
> I took a look at the log4net project and it looks like there they just
> package everything into one file.
>
> See:
> http://logging.apache.org/log4net/download.html
>
> Regards
> Tim.
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4155 (20090615) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4156 (20090615) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4157 (20090615) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4157 (20090615) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>

Mime
View raw message