Return-Path: 
 <forrest-dev-return-2829-apmail-xml-forrest-dev-archive=xml.apache.org@xml.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-xml-forrest-dev-archive@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 54227 invoked by uid 500); 27 Oct 2002 08:55:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:forrest-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:forrest-dev@xml.apache.org>
Reply-To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 54200 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2002 08:55:30 -0000
Received: from eos.telenet-ops.be (195.130.132.40)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Oct 2002 08:55:30 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by eos.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id 726E520315
	for <forrest-dev@xml.apache.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:55:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from outerthought.org (D5E00A87.kabel.telenet.be [213.224.10.135])
	by eos.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 524EC204F7
	for <forrest-dev@xml.apache.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:55:43 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <3DBBAA0F.4040303@outerthought.org>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:55:43 +0100
From: Steven Noels <stevenn@outerthought.org>
Organization: Outerthought
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Forrest uses 'old' version of Ant
References: <20021026164808.GE10149@expresso.localdomain>
 <OFB21CF7A8.EDF6884E-ONCA256C5E.005D015E-CA256C5E.005D5FF8@multitask.com.au>
 <20021026172414.GH10149@expresso.localdomain> <3DBB1CBF.4000408@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-Keywords: 

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> I am discussing about using Forrest in a project, and they just said 
> that having to install Forrest is a no-no.
> 
> They want to have all Forrest checked in with every site, so that the 
> doc writer can get from CVS, and run build.bat/.sh.

> It has been discussed before, I agree it sucks, but it's what our users 
> need.

Aren't we overgeneralizing here? 'They', 'our users',... or just the few 
opinionated ones that believe their way is the way?

I like the shbat approach - just like I like the ability to install Ant 
as a separate app instead of just using the jars.

We should come up with a lean & mean executable version of Forrest, 
depending on Ant already being installed. If what remains of Centipede 
inside Forrest can't support this, we have some cleanup to do.

And if we want to provide a live webapp version for local development, 
and Tomcat isn't lightweight enough to embed inside Forrest, why not use 
Jetty?

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
stevenn@outerthought.org                      stevenn@apache.org