forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Forrestbot live!
Date Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:14:49 GMT

Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 04:35:06PM +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> ...
>>I like this Forrestbot, it's basically a better version of AntGump.
>>Given the generality of the tool, and given that other times on this 
>>list it has been decided not to "pollute" our mission of site 
>>generation, what is the relationship with Gump?
>>In other words, would it make sense to you all to make this part of the 
>>Gump codebase?
> Depends what you mean by 'this'.
> Forrestbot itself is is pretty crufty and horrible, because it tries to
> reuse while trying to avoid inconvenient inter-target
> dependencies.  That causes bugs like the skin being ignored.

It can/should/will be fixed.

> The webapp is almost completely detached from forrestbot.  It could drive
> any command-line tool that operates on a project (ant, maven, centipede,
> checkstyle?, gump?).  If you can find some other tool to put behind the
> webapp, then it makes sense to a) remove 'forrestbot' from the webapp
> title, as Stefano suggests, b) move it somewhere neutral like Alexandria.

Ok, then I think we agree.
I don't want it to be moved from here till it will be stable for our 
uses, it would kill it.

But eventually, yes, I'm sure it will make sense to move it to the Gump 
codebase. It's Gump the "neurtal" tool, so it could go there.
Anyway, we will discuss this when the time is ripe, in the meantime I'll 
try to see that we keep the bot-webapp as neutral as reasonably possible.

>>Since the Gump CVS will probably be open to all Apache 
>>committers, it would not be a commit problem.
> ...

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

View raw message