ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From eh...@employease.com
Subject RE: cruisecontrol vs anthill
Date Wed, 16 Oct 2002 19:20:12 GMT
Today I submitted a patch for CruiseControl that will allow you to use
"context params" instead of "servlet params" to configure CruiseControl,
thus allowing you to not have to muck with the WAR itself to configure it.
It also makes running CC for multiple builds less cumbersome.  Hopefully the
people at CruiseControl will accept the patch and incorporate it into the
source.

If you are using Tomcat 4.1, it is trivial to set up one or more contexts
that all use a single CruiseControl WAR.  You would simply create xml files
containing the context definition in the webapps directory for each build.
The CC configuration would reside in the context definition, outside of the
WAR.  See
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/config/context.html for more
information regarding Tomcat contexts.

For example, if you had just one project called "mybuild," you would create
mybuild.xml in the Tomcat webapps directory that contains:

<Context path="/mybuild" docBase="cruisecontrol" debug="0"
privileged="false">
  <Parameter name="logDir" value="/PATH/TO/LOG/FILES/"/>
  <Parameter name="currentBuildStatusFile"
    value="/PATH/TO/CURRENT/BUILD/STATUS/FILE/currentbuild.txt"/>
</Context>

This example assumes you've unpacked the CC WAR file in the webapps
directory, in a subdirectory called "cruisecontrol".

Ed Howe

-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:jakarta-ant@ehatchersolutions.com]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:05 AM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: Re: cruisecontrol vs anthill


Wannheden, Knut wrote:
> Erik,
> 
> 
>>We use CruiseControl on my work project and its working well, 
>>although 
>>it is mildly painful to set up and get running.  I expect more from 
>>CruiseControl though, given its Martin Fowler's company 
>>people that are 
>>developing it (are you listening Thoughtworks?! :) - having to tweak 
>>configuration *inside* a WAR file is just not cool - make a better 
>>interface, leverage the slickness of Anthill in this respect (sorry, 
>>while I had a soap box I thought I'd use it :).
>>
> 
> 
> Are you using the newest version (2.0, released 25. September 2002) of
> CruiseControl?  Just wondering since many of the things mentioned in your
> chart seem to have changed with the new version, but I haven't had time to
> try it.

Yes, we're using CC 2.0 at work and nothing dramatic has changed that I 
can tell.  The configuration file is now in XML format and we are using 
the HTML formatted e-mail notification.  I'm sure there are other 
improvements, but the configuration inside the WAR is still present (I 
believe) and its still fiddly to get configured completely right.

Its well worth having some type of continuous integration process 
running though.  By all means automate your builds somehow, even if its 
a cron job nightly running a shell script to checkout a fresh copy of 
the code base, run Ant, and send an e-mail of the results.  :)

	Erik



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message