commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <>
Subject Re: [jelly] Stable release?
Date Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:36:46 GMT
From: "Mark R. Diggory" <>
> James Strachan wrote:
> > From: "Mark R. Diggory" <>
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I'm curious what is currently the most stable release of Jelly? I
> >>checked out the cvs tree and tries to build it, but it seems to break on
> >>certain dependencies.
> >
> >
> > It shouldn't do. Are you using Maven to build it? What problems did you
> > find - it should all just work.
> >
>      [javac]
> cannot resolve symbol
>      [javac] symbol  : class ConstructorUtils
>      [javac] location: package beanutils
>      [javac] import org.apache.commons.beanutils.ConstructorUtils;
>      [javac]                                     ^
>      [javac]
> cannot resolve symbol
>      [javac] symbol  : variable ConstructorUtils
>      [javac] location: class org.apache.commons.jelly.tags.core.NewTag
>      [javac]             object =
> ConstructorUtils.invokeConstructor(theClass,values,types);
>      [javac]                      ^
>      [javac] 2 errors
> file:/root/CVS_ROOT/jakarta-commons-sandbox/jelly/build.xml:34: Compile
> failed; see the compiler error output for details.

This looks like you've got an old version of commons-beanutils. Wierd, Maven
should have automatically reloaded this for you

If you delete the jars in $MAVEN_HOME/repository/commmons-beanutils/jars

and do another build it should work fine I think

BTW which Maven version is this?

> >>I'd like to begin experimenting with Jelly as a
> >>Mathematical Simulation tool, not neccessarily as a developer, so I'd
> >>like a pretty stable release thats going to not be too buggy.
> >
> >
> > Its pretty stable - its been used in various projects such as Maven for
> > quite some time. Though we do really need to get a release out soon so
> > can depend on a formal release. Until now you could depend on a snapshot
> > build from here...
> >
> >
> >
> This is helpfull, but there are a great number of versions (nightly
> builds?, beta N's, dev branchs) which is the best to use?

The latest :-)

> For my experience working with other jakarta commons projects, its often
> hard to judge what the best release (formal or informal) to use is.

Totally agree and understand.

> I definitly agree with the release thread going on now. For Jelly to be
> of use to the common user, there needs to be stable release points they
> can reley on. If their own work is based on the bleeding edge of the
> development branch it will create much suffering for them. This is
> because the HEAD branch cycles between states of stablity/unstability as
> development progresses. Depending on when they checkout the cvs, they
> could be grabbing from anywhere in cycle.


> Another question, do you have a current timeline for releasing 1.0?

Not right now no. If its any help, I don't expect much in the way of code
changes between now and 1.0 and certainly the API should remain pretty
consistent -  I think its mostly gonna be documentation & packaging issues.


Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message