forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: [GUMP@brutus]: Project forrest (in module forrest) failed
Date Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:02:10 GMT
Dave Brondsema wrote:
> Quoting Juan Jose Pablos:
> > David Crossley wrote:
> > >That was a drastic way to "solve" a problem.
> > >
> > but, do you think that it is the right solution?
> I think the skinconf should validate, but that it isn't necessary to build
> forrest.  So this cheche's change is good, but we also need to fix the skinconf.xml

I reckon move it or fix it, rather than delete it.
Comment it out for now with a FIXME note, so we
don't need to rummage around in history to find it later.
Also the FIXME serves as a reminder.

Anyway, i think that we should still validate the default
skinconf.xml from our fresh seed site during the main build.

But also there is something wrong with Gump if it cannot
now run xmlvalidate. It would be better to help Gump
to solve it. Later, then.

> > >>Maybe I should look to install a gump system here somewhere, It would be

> > >>faster to test this stuff out.
> > >
> > >
> > >The main gump does run twice per day and the kaffe run is in-between.
> > >So that is plenty.
> > >
> > ok, but then we make a change and we have to wait 6 hours to test it :-)

Relax. :-)

> For those unfamiliar with Gump, as I was once, our project file is in CVS at
> gump/project/forrest.xml.  If you look at it (see
> you can
> see the <ant> element specifies how the gump run is done.  So you can run "ant
> -Dversion=testdate gump" in main/ and that will fairly accurately simulate a
> gump run.  I'm not sure the best way to get exact classpath and jars that gump
> would use, but that's not related to this specific problem anyway.

Good tip, thanks. We should talk about that at general@gump


View raw message