On Nov 7, 2007 1:23 PM, Felix Knecht <felixk@apache.org> wrote:
What 'profiles' are (intended) used for studio distributions?
Shall all possibilities you can download an RCP dist for be supported
and build ()?

Right now we support the following distributions:
Mac OS X PPC and i386 (Intel)
Windows (tested on XP and Vista, and it should work on Windows 2000 too)
Linux PPC, i386 and AMD64

I think they are the most commonly used configurations and we should concentrate on these one. There no need to build a Linux (x86/Motif) version if nobody needs it. If someone uses Linux (x86/Motif) and tells us on the ML he would like a version of Studio, then we can integrate this one.

They are varying depending on the version of RCP your looking at:
And - when migration to maven build process - which version(s) shall be
used (ATM it's 3.2.1 based)?
Yes, it's based on 3.2.1 at the moment. This is because we could not get a way to generate (within eclipse) the executables for Apache Directory Studio (to replace the 3.2.1 ones) with Eclipse 3.3.0. I could not export the RCP Application as a Mac OS X application correctly, the export was failing... Maybe version fixes that, I'll have to try again.

It would be very great if we could migrate both Ant+Ivy to Maven and Eclipse version 3.2.1 to Eclipse version 3.3.x (for our Eclipse dependencies).

For eclipse most of the dependencies do not exist in a remote maven
repository. Do you think it's possible/make sense to put them e.g. to
the http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 repository (I think this is owned by
ASF)? This could avoid the need of keeping them in a 'local-repo' within
the studio project.
Anyway I need to fix creation of the emtpy folders.

Now, that you prepared all the packages in their Maven repository format, why not. But I wonder if that will be ok with the repository and the Eclipse Foundation.

FYI, I have updated the page with our discussion (I need to update it with the comments of this mail too).

Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot