beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Feit <richf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: v1, maven, pollinate [was: Re: reorganizing netui-blank]
Date Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:30:27 GMT
Ah, looks nice.  So it's not hard to plug in your own UI for creating a
project in an "alternate" framework.  Yeah, I think this would be great!
Rich

Glauber Adriano Reis wrote:

> Rich,
>
> Yes, I mean building a Beehive Webproject inside NetBeans 5.0 much like
> it going to be with struts and JSF. For a nb Web Project there is a
> possibility
> of "registering" frameworks, there is inicial support for JSF and
> Struts. I
> think it would be cool having Beehive as another option for web
> framework.
>
> http://web.netbeans.org/extensionSupport/ExtensionSupportUISpec.html
> http://web.netbeans.org/struts/struts-support-ui-spec.html
>
>
> Glauber Adriano
>
>
>
> Rich Feit wrote:
>
>> I forgot to mention under #2 that having some sort of Beehive support in
>> NetBeans would be great.  This means support for building a Beehive
>> project?
>>
>> Rich Feit wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I changed the subject line here, just so this doesn't get lost among
>>> the
>>> discussion of netui-blank.  Here's my take on these three questions:
>>>
>>> 1. I don't think maven-ized samples would be bundled with v1.  Adam
>>> Jenkins is contributing the maven plugin (which is much-needed), but I
>>> think that a maven  option wouldn't be worked into the distribution
>>> until v1.1 (or whatever the next point release is).  That's just my
>>> guess.  The reason for this can be found in my answer to #3.  :)  It
>>> does look like Eddie is working on getting our JARs out on the
>>> repository in time for v1:
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/beehive-user/200509.mbox/%3ce9ac8354050908212661019f8@mail.gmail.com%3e
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>>> 2. I agree that the loss of momentum on Pollinate is disappointing,
>>> although I'm still really hopeful that something will appear under
>>> Eclipse eventually.  I agree with Adam's statement that this is a
>>> missing piece which would really help carry Beehive forward (by making
>>> it more accessible and also digestible by management types).  A
>>> discussion about collaboration with the Pollinate project is probably
>>> something we should have after v1 goes out.
>>>
>>> 3. v1.  Yes, I would be shocked if we didn't release it this week. 
>>> This
>>> project model issue is the only one we need to resolve, as far as I
>>> know, and so far everyone's been supportive of it.
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>>
>>> Glauber Adriano Reis wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm happy now, the layout makes its way smothly into NetBeans when you
>>>> import it as an
>>>> external web project.
>>>> I've got 3 questions:
>>>> 1 - would maven-ized samples be bundled with V1? If so, I read in the
>>>> mailing list
>>>> about the plugin(I was working on such a thing as well but stoped
>>>> since it had
>>>> been already developed) but I cannot find the plugin or anything
>>>> mentioning it in JIRA.
>>>>
>>>> 2 - Such a pity that Pollinate project is dead. What you guys think?
>>>> ...the latest
>>>> NeBeans version to be released (v5) will have struts support. I think
>>>> it would be cool
>>>> having some sort of minimal beehive support as well, I'd be very glad
>>>> working on it (since I probably
>>>> wont use WebLogic 9 eclipse plugins) but want you opinion.
>>>>
>>>> 3 - Is Beehive V1 due out this week? I'm pretty much anxious...  :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Glauber Adriano
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Eddie O'Neil 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