forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Forresbot WANTED
Date Wed, 27 Nov 2002 07:58:57 GMT

Steven Noels wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>> Steven Noels wrote:
>>  > I don't know much about Gump, but presumably we could host a Gump
>>  > instance
>> If you are willing to set up an ID for me, I would set everything up 
>> and keep it running.  Gump requires a fair amount of disk space, and 
>> at the moment I've standardized on JDK 1.4.  In return, you will have 
>> access not only to the source to nearly every project you could care 
>> to have access to, but you will also be able to build most of them.
> Wouldn't it be possible to just build the documentation instead? I'm 
> very reluctant to have source code compilation running on that machine, 
> but a number of Forrest CLI instances, I wouldn't mind. OTOH, that we 
> can do just as well with our own forrestbot, if we just bite the bullet 
> and forego the obligatory CVS transfer method (and use rsync or scp for 
> transferring files to daedalus).
> Nicola: what would be the benefit of using Gump instead of our own 
> forrestbot?

Apart from the fact that if someone elses does something for me I'm 
always happy ;-) , the Forrestbot has a major shortcoming: it uses 
sources from CVS and does not include stuff like javadocs and any doc 
that the application generates during compilation.

When we will have a more robust way of embedding dynamically generated 
content to Forrest, it will be definately an issue.

The Forrestbot is still needed for those sites that don't want to have 
to set up gump and need regular updates; IMHO all Apache projects would 
be better using Forrest in Gump.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message