continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Venisse <emman...@venisse.net>
Subject Re: contents of a 1.1 release
Date Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:11:45 GMT
jwebunit

Dan Tran a écrit :
> Just curious, what kind of web test framework are you going to use?
> 
> -D
> 
> 
> On 10/18/06, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@venisse.net> wrote:
>>
>> Next week, I'll start implementation of UI tests for all screens.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> Jason van Zyl a écrit :
>> >
>> > On 17 Oct 06, at 2:34 PM 17 Oct 06, Brett Porter wrote:
>> >
>> >> I agree with Emmanuel. IIRC, the profiles are already in the model,
>> >> and basic choice of which JDK and maven/ant installation to use should
>> >> be straightforward and extremely useful. I agree that making it more
>> >> pervasive and using the toolchain support would be even better, but I
>> >> don't believe it needs to wait for that.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I would be against any more radical changes until the testing setup is
>> > rock solid. We're slipping in this area. We don't really know what
>> > machines this stuff runs on and I don't think anything is automated
>> > anymore. We need to stop paying lip service to what we are preaching.
>> >
>> > Jason.
>> >
>> >> - Brett
>> >>
>> >> On 18/10/2006, at 12:54 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The introduction of continuum profiles isn't impacted by the
>> >>> DefaultContinuum refactoring.
>> >>> If we don't provide a full continuum profiles implementation in 1.1,
>> >>> I think we can do a minimal one  with only the possibility to choose
>> >>> the maven1/maven2/ant/java home directories and use them instead of
>> >>> using maven/ant/mvn/java from the PATH. This feature isn't big to do.
>> >>>
>> >>> In 1.1, I'd like to see the possibility to choose in build
>> >>> definitions if a project is built with an update (like it's done
>> >>> actually) or with a clean checkout.
>> >>>
>> >>> The last point, I'd like to see in 1.1 is the dependency/parent
>> >>> change build-trigger.
>> >>>
>> >>> All these features are awaited by users since a long time. I don't
>> >>> think the implementation will take lot of time, so they can be add in
>> >>> 1.1.
>> >>>
>> >>> Of course, we need a database migration tool for the release too.
>> >>>
>> >>> Emmanuel
>> >>>
>> >>> Jesse McConnell a écrit :
>> >>>> I was going to try and wrap my head about what needed to get wrapped
>> >>>> up for a 1.1 release of continuum this week when I got to talking
to
>> >>>> emmanuel this morning.
>> >>>> I had been under the impression that we were getting near a point
>> that
>> >>>> we might want to polish things up and cut a 1.1 release but emm
was
>> >>>> thinking that we ought to have another big push for new features
>> >>>> before we start polishing things up.  So I told him I would mention
>> >>>> our talk and see what kinda interest we got from people on new
>> >>>> features and who might want to tackle what in the short term, or
if
>> we
>> >>>> wanted to put some things out into the longer term bin.
>> >>>> One of the major things that I had been thinking we would push 
>> off to
>> >>>> the 1.2 release was the profiles.  Its a slightly overridden term
as
>> >>>> it has little to do with maven profiles, but in my mind at least
the
>> >>>> profiles were going to be 1/3 of a trinity by which builds could
be
>> >>>> setup to run.
>> >>>> The trinity being: profile (maven instance, env vars, maven 
>> profiles,
>> >>>> jdk instance, etc), temporal ( scheduled cron, when dependency
>> >>>> changes, scm activity, etc) and the project group (bundle of
>> >>>> projects).  I was figuring that those three things taken together
>> >>>> ought meet the requirements for building what, where and when. 
It
>> >>>> would be a matter of setting up the permutations of those three
>> >>>> components, for example: 2 profiles, 1 schedule, 1 project group
>> would
>> >>>> make 2 instances of schedulable FOO.
>> >>>> Anyway, I digress...profiles would be one large feature that 
>> would be
>> >>>> wonderful to have in continuum, sooner the better.  But it would
be
>> >>>> pretty massive effects on the codebase.  So massive that I would
>> think
>> >>>> we ought to consider splitting up the DefaultContinuum object into
>> the
>> >>>> workflows that have been kicked around, making things like 'Add
>> >>>> Project To Project Group' extensible by users so they can trigger

>> any
>> >>>> other processes they might want running on those events.  Trygve
has
>> >>>> some definite ideas in this area, perhaps using the plexus-spe code.
>> >>>> The actions in continuum have been a first pass attempt at starting
>> to
>> >>>> break things out of the DC object which is pretty big atm.
>> >>>> If we were going to rip the top off of the DefaultContinuum object
>> and
>> >>>> add/modify in the profile concepts into the store then we really
>> ought
>> >>>> to clean up the whole store api which is more painful to work with
>> >>>> then it really should be.  joakim and I had a lot of success with
>> >>>> structuring things nicely in the plexus-security jdo stores and
we
>> >>>> could probably apply a ton of the concepts there in terms of api
to
>> >>>> the continuum-store and make it scads easier to work with.
>> >>>> and on and on.
>> >>>> I agree with Emmanuel that since 1.1 as it currently stands is not
>> >>>> backwards compatible (I think) with the old database we ought to

>> just
>> >>>> add in what we need now...But doing this will definitely move out
a
>> >>>> 1.1 release into the new year...and is that something we want to
do?
>> >>>> I dunno really, personally I would be cool with adding in profiles
>> and
>> >>>> refactoring the core chunks of continuum up now and get it over

>> with,
>> >>>> but does anyone else have anything to say on the matter?  I know
we
>> >>>> have had a lot more interest recently by folks like rahul and
>> >>>> christian on participating, would you guys be interested in 
>> taking on
>> >>>> some of these challenges with us?  Theres nothing like ripping
>> through
>> >>>> the guts of code to really get involved :)
>> >>>> thoughts?  should we open this out to the users list maybe?
>> >>>> jesse
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
> 


Mime
View raw message