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 Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:44:59 GMT
OK, this is in with revision 280244.  I added some release notes
(/release_notes.html in the docs) about it.  I realize this is a v1, but
it seems like an important enough change from v1m1 to mention.  Let me
know if you see any problems with it.

Thanks,
Rich

Eddie O'Neil wrote:

>  Sweet...works for me.
>
>  Fix for BEEHIVE-921 should be in momentarily...
>
>Eddie
>
>
>
>On 9/11/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>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