forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: Forresbot WANTED
Date Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:34:46 GMT
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:51PM +0100, Steven Noels wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >DEfinately doable, Gump has the notion of profiles, but I want to have 
> >it working for all apache projects that ask for it (James is in 
> >Jakarta-land for example)
> >
> >I still think that making Forrest work in Gump is the best solution for 
> >Apache projects; I am working on that front now.
> OK. If we use Gump, I assume the current three instances already provide 
> plenty of CPU cycles to do the Forrest site generations, too.
> So what do we do then with the Forrestbot facility? Keep it for 
> non-Apache projects?

There's no real difference between what the Forrestbot does and what Gump
does.  By comparison (forrestbot ; gump):

An XML descriptor (forrestbot.conf.xml ; module.xml)
generates a script ( ;
which call targets in the real build script ( ; build.xml ).

I'd guess the Forrestbot is same as the AntGump proposal.

Currently, we have a config2work.xsl script, which generates an Ant
script.  We could just as easily have a config2sh.xsl script, which
generates something like Gump's

So IMO, Forrestbot as a Gump extension makes sense.

But then, Forrestbot as Forrestbot also makes sense.  Currently there is
absolutely no reason to _require_ Gump to run the Forrestbot.  I've got 4
projects running through a Forrestbot already.  I just need to fix the
mail support and we'll have a regression suite.  Gump support is nice but
(not yet) necessary for Apache projects.


> </Steven>
> -- 
> Steven Noels                  
> Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
> Read my weblog at    
> stevenn at                stevenn at

View raw message