beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Feit <richf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: reorganizing netui-blank [was: [Re: beehive-914 -- started yet?]]
Date Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:26:02 GMT
OK, I'm just going to remove the 'classoutputdir' and 'weboutputdir'
attributes.  If anyone complains I can set up something fancier to
continue "supporting" deprecated 'classoutputdir' and 'weboutputdir'.

Rich

Eddie O'Neil wrote:

>Rich--
>
>  Yep...good catch on the classoutputdir thing.  I was starting to run
>through the tutorials and would have wondered why they didn't work. 
>:)  There was also a problem with the "war" target.
>
>  Appears that the build is working correctly now -- the generated
>files and runtime end up in the right place.
>
>  I'm all for adding the "destdir" attribute in lieu of having the
>"classoutputdir" attribute.  I'll leave it to you about the
>deprecation vs. remove thing -- personally, I'd remove them so we
>don't have to support them forever, but that's just me.  ;)
>
>  Should have this committed soon...
>
>Eddie
>
>
>
>On 9/11/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>+1.  There actually needs to be a small change to the patch, though, and
>>there probably needs to be a change to the <build-pageflows> macro
>>itself.  For the patch, this line in user/netui-blank/build.xml:
>>
>>    weboutputdir="${build.dir}"
>>
>>...needs to be replaced with this:
>>
>>    classoutputdir="${build.dir}/WEB-INF/classes"
>>
>>Otherwise, classes will be built to ${web.dir}/WEB-INF/src.  And if we
>>accept the proposed changes below, 'classoutputdir' would be replaced
>>with 'destdir'.
>>
>>Now, as to <build-pageflows>, I actually think we need to make the
>>following changes, given the move to generating all files into
>>WEB-INF/classes (started writing an email about this yesterday):
>>
>>    - Add a 'destdir', to be in line with the rest of the macros (and
>>javac).  We couldn't do this before because there were *two* destdirs
>>('classoutputdir', 'weboutputdir').
>>    - Deprecate 'classoutputdir'.  If it's present and 'destdir' is not
>>present, make 'destdir' default to @{classoutputdir}.
>>    - Deprecate the 'weboutputdir' attribute, but if it's present and
>>'destdir' is not present, make 'destdir' default to
>>@{weboutputdir}/WEB-INF/classes.
>>
>>An alternative would be to simply remove 'classoutputdir' and
>>'weboutputdir' (no deprecation -- would cause anyone using v1m1 to
>>change their builds).  What do you think?
>>
>>Rich
>>
>>Daryl Olander wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>+1 I think it best that we make this kind of changes now before we ship 1.0,
>>>this is a better model.
>>>
>>>On 9/11/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>All--
>>>>
>>>>I've got a patch ready which will reorganize the
>>>><dist-root>/samples/netui-blank web project from a source-in model
>>>>like:
>>>>
>>>>fooWeb/
>>>>Controller.java
>>>>index.jsp
>>>>WEB-INF/
>>>>web.xml
>>>>src/
>>>>build.xml
>>>>build.properties
>>>>Foo.java
>>>>
>>>>to a source-peer model like:
>>>>
>>>>fooWeb/
>>>>build.xml
>>>>build.properties
>>>>src/
>>>>Foo.java
>>>>web/
>>>>index.jsp
>>>>Controller.java
>>>>WEB-INF/
>>>>web.xml
>>>>
>>>>This brings the OOTB NetUI project model in-line with that prescribed
>>>>by Tomcat and used in many projects. It's also what Adriano suggested
>>>>and used for his NetBeans project.
>>>>
>>>>We're getting in the last days before 1.0 here, so we need to do two
>>>>things:
>>>>
>>>>1) agree that this is the right thing to do
>>>>2) review the patch in this bug --
>>>>http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEEHIVE-921
>>>>
>>>>Please do both; if you disagree with (1), say so! :)
>>>>
>>>>Once / if we agree on this, I'll commit it and take a couple of hours
>>>>to rework some documentation. And, hopefully we can branch and ship
>>>>1.0. :)
>>>>
>>>>Eddie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Sounds great! Leaving netui-samples and netui-jsf seems like the right
>>>>>thing to hold off for 1.1.
>>>>>
>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Awesome. I'll make this change for netui-blank but will leave
>>>>>>netui-jsf and netui-samples for the sake of stability. We can fix
>>>>>>those for Beehive 1.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This would switch the default NetUI project model to something that
>>>>>>looks like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/appdev/source.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>which is basically:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>fooWebProject/
>>>>>>web/
>>>>>>src/
>>>>>>build.xml
>>>>>>build.properties
>>>>>>
>>>>>>with a build that works like samples/petstoreWeb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Any other thoughts about doing this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I definitely agree on #2 (if I'm understanding you correctly)
-- I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>think
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>it should support the Tomcat model you're describing. Originally
I'd
>>>>>>>suggested supporting both because netui-blank is in the old project
>>>>>>>model, so I assumed that this is the only one we would be supporting.
>>>>>>>So I support making this change...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>1) yes, this simply adds a convenience target to beehive-imports.xml.
>>>>>>>>It doesn't attempt to fix the validation problem discussed
earlier --
>>>>>>>>depending on how it's fixed, that might be an SVN-side issue
with
>>>>>>>>building the distribution.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>2) I agree that we are moving away from the WEB-INF/src project
model
>>>>>>>>and onto the Tomcat model where web/ and src/ are peers. This
target
>>>>>>>>certainly could support both models, but it's just easier
to have it
>>>>>>>>support the one Tomcat prescribes that is widely used and
is easily
>>>>>>>>supported in various IDEs. We can document how to setup a
project
>>>>>>>>with source-in-webapp. If there was enough interest, we could
make
>>>>>>>>this change now...it only affects netui-samples, netui-blank,
and
>>>>>>>>netui-jsf.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Rich Feit wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I see - so this isn't the complex part of the change we
were talking
>>>>>>>>>about. This is simply adding an ant target to beehive-imports.xml.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>It
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>seems like a good addition, but one question I have is
whether we
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>should
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>be supporting different project models with something
like this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>Seems
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>like we're moving away from a source-under-web-content
model. What
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>do
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>you think?
>>>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Here's the Ant that will do this; it patches
>>>>>>>>>>trunk/user/beehive-imports.xml and can be run as:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>$> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>which will prompt for a destination directory for
the project. Or,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>can be run like:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>$> ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.netui.webapp
-Dwebapp.dir
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>which will skp the prompt since "webapp.dir" has already
been
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>provided.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I think this will be *really* useful and less error-prone
than the
>>>>>>>>>>alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>>>>><target name="new.netui.webapp" description="Create
>>>>>>>>>>a new NetUI-enabled Beehive webapp">
>>>>>>>>>><input message="Provide a fully-qualified web project
path:"
>>>>>>>>>>addproperty="webapp.dir"/>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>><copy todir="${webapp.dir}">
>>>>>>>>>><fileset dir="${basedir}/samples/netui-blank">
>>>>>>>>>><include name="**/*"/>
>>>>>>>>>></fileset>
>>>>>>>>>></copy>
>>>>>>>>>><deploy-netui webappDir="${webapp.dir}"/>
>>>>>>>>>><echo>Created a NetUI-enabled in ${webapp.dir}</echo>
>>>>>>>>>></target>
>>>>>>>>>></snip>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Gotcha. As far as the docs, I've got a placeholder
in the
>>>>>>>>>>>netui/projects.xml doc already that describes
the cp / ant -f
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>step.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>So, that part is easy. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Patch forthcoming...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Oh, I just meant we should take a week to
have people play with
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>if we
>>>>>>>>>>>>put it in for 1.0, that's all. I think we'd
want to get it into
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>docs, too, especially where there are instructions
for copying
>>>>>>>>>>>>netui-blank, etc. What do you think about
that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I'd definitely take a look at the diff, though,
even if it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>something
>>>>>>>>>>>>we hold until v1.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yeah -- I don't think it would take a
week (probably just a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>couple
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>of hours), but it's a little different
than how we do things
>>>>>>>>>>>>>right now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>because we need to support two scenarios:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>- create a new webapp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>- inject the runtime files (JARs / resources)
into the samples
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>We've got the latter and could easily
add the former.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>But, we'll get very little test mileage
on it in the near term.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>can take a crack at it and see what you
think of the diff...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Definitely, this would be a great
thing to have. I have a local
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>script
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that does exactly this -- in retrospect,
this should have made
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>me think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of an ant target. I think it's something
that we should do for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>1.1,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>unless we want to delay the release
for a week or so...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's complicated. :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We really need a target that can
"seed" a Beehive webapp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>including
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>all of the validation config files,
runtime JARs, and NetUI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>URL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>addressable resources. Today,
this is done using a command
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cp -rf samples/netui-blank <project-dir>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ant -f ant/beehive-runtime.xml
deploy.beehive.webapp.runtime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-Dwebapp.dir=<project-dir>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If, for example, you just do the
latter, you'll end up with a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>webapp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that has the runtime but no web.xml
or validation config
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>files. And,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that's kind of bad...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Would be *very* nice to have a
target that just does:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ant -f beehive-imports.xml new.beehive.webapp
-Dproject.dir=..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It could even prompt for the project.dir
-- kind of like a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>project
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wizard in Ant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We could do this for 1.0, but
it's not an insignificant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's *definitely* something we
need for 1.1...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yeah, if it's complicated
at all, I agree.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Daryl Olander wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                         
      
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+1 to doing the real fix
post 1.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Eddie O'Neil
<ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                     
            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I take it back...this
isn't a straightforward thing to fix
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>unfortunately because
it affects the Ant used to provide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                 
                  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>runtime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in both the distribution
and SVN builds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't be hard
to change it, but if we're going to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that, we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>should add the beehive-netui-validator-config.xml
file (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>consider
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>adding web.xml) to
those as well...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I agree (now) having
them checked in is the right thing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>unless we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>want to tackle the
bigger problem of copying all of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>config files.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And, I'd rather ship
1.0 and fix that later. :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/9/05, Rich Feit
<richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                 
                  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>OK, I certainly
don't have an objection to that... thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>             
                        
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Right, it
doesn't *have* to happen now, but doing it now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ensures
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that we're
consistent. So, I'm going to go ahead and fix
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>while you're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>getting the
compiler change in.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich Feit
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         
                              
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I haven't
started it -- it doesn't seem like anything
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that has
to go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>into v1,
right? Just checking. I did update the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>checked-in
files to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     
                                    
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                 
                  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of the
right version -- this is just the longer-term fix
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to ensure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     
                                    
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                 
                  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this doesn't
happen again... :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
O'Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     
                                    
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Have
you started fixing BEEHIVE-914 yet? If not, let me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>know
and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'll
take that one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
                                          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message