Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 08:44:14 +1100
From: David Crossley <crossley@apache.org>
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: forrestbot problems
Message-ID: <20051130214414.GC17180@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
References: <499888440511291331k715b4641p1c54b0a50aa2df29@mail.gmail.com>
 <20051130001206.GA14063@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <499888440511291737l2699de8g22bd381d6c877e6f@mail.gmail.com>
 <20051130063351.GA16491@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <499888440511300700n58720013mdb82a930441d4065@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <499888440511300700n58720013mdb82a930441d4065@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

Tim Williams wrote:
> >
> > Ah, now i see what you were doing. Was 'svn diff' showing
> > the changes that you would expect?
> 
> For that specific file it was.  It also "thinks" there are multiple
> other files that have changes that I wouldn't have expected to have
> been changed.  Looking at the diff of those files, I can only gather
> that they are line ending changes because there aren't visibly any
> differences between old and new.

Would you please provide an example of a file that has
such problems. If it is diffs in certain comments,
then we know that problem (Ross mentioned it in other
mail in this thread).

Also can you double-check that your Subversion configuration
is okay:
http://www.apache.org/dev/version-control.html#https-svn

> > > > > svn: 'M     pluginDocs\plugins_0_70\org.apache.forrest.plugin.internal.IMSManife
> > > > > st\repositoryCommand\getSCO\HowTo\repositoryURI\www.burrokeet.org\repositoryData
> > > > > ' is not a working copy
> > > >
> > > > I don't know what that is about. Those docs are not handled
> > > > by forrestbot nor the "site-author" build. The pluginDocs
> > > > have their own deployment mechanism. So this is supporting
> > > > my suggestion above to remove the site-author/build/forrest-docs/
> > >
> > > Yeah, I have done that.  Actually, in the many times that I've tried
> > > forrestbot, I've completely deleted and rechecked out the entire
> > > trunk.  So cleanliness, I think, isn't likely an issue.
> >
> > Well i cannot explain why that IMSManifest stuff has been
> > touched. The "M" means locally modified. And it should not be.
> >
> > Another thing that i don't understand is that it seems that
> > every file has been added again.
> 
> The first time I run through the sequence, the toadd file has only
> these IMSManifest files.  Running through the second time has the
> numerous other files in there as well.  Running svn status myself, not
> surprisingly, results in the same.
> 
> > I just tried again myself by removing both site-author/build
> > and site-author/work directories then
> >  forrest -f publish.xml build
> >  forrest -f publish.xml deploy
> >
> > Nothing was deployed. I suppose that that is normal.
> 
> I don't understand why this is normal.  If it's really necessary to
> run through the sequence twice on a fresh site-author then we should
> add that to the doc.  Can you explain more about why this is expected?
>  I'd like to understand.

Sorry i have no idea. That is why i said "i suppose".

> > The main info that i was seeking was that you were able to
> > commit to the forrest/site repository. Try the manual method
> > described above. Or perhaps try tweaking an html doc in
> > site-author\work\svn-deploy\forrest-docs\
> > and then 'svn commit' it.
> 
> You've probably already seen, but I can manually commit to the site repo.

Good, so no permissions issues.

> > >  I want to mention too that I've got a Linux (fedora core)
> > > box that is my file/print server at home and I've tried forrrestbot on
> > > it too to no avail -- I don't remember if the errors are exactly the
> > > same or not though.
> >
> > Hmmm, i wish that someone else would try it.
> 
> Me too.  I don't doubt though that I'm doing something wrong -- just
> can't figure out what it is.  I ran through it again on my linux box
> and the issue is exactly the same as I've been describing so it
> doesn't appear to be a windows thing.

Oh wow, that is really strange.

-David