geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Unstable builds -- use uberbuild?
Date Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:04:49 GMT
license questions aside, I think that would be fine and the most likely 
way to get something reasonably consistent and repeatable until we have 
a m2 build.

david jencks

On Jul 10, 2005, at 11:58 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> 	I'm fooling with David B's script to cerate the unstable builds..
> It didn't work for me originally becasue at the time we depended on 
> some
> TranQL changes that weren't in a TranQL SNAPSHOT.  In the last couple 
> days
> we've also had changes in OpenEJB required by Geronimo.
> 	It seems to me that the easiest course would be to have the script
> do an uberbuild:
>
> svn co [geronimo] && cd geronimo && maven m:co && maven m:rebuild-all
>
> 	Then we're pretty sure the binary will be coordinated.  The next
> question is whether we should include the TranQL and OpenEJB source in 
> our
> source tarball or just the Geronimo source.  I guess for official 
> builds
> we probably need to restrict it to geronimo source for licensing 
> reasons.
> I'm not sure if that would be compelling for unstable builds.  It 
> would be
> nice to have the whole tree in there together, even though this still
> doesn't make the whole thing "repeatable" (since we still depend on so
> many SNAPSHOTS).
>
> 	I don't want to start the shapshot issue on this thread, though, I
> just wonder what others think about building a binary via the uberbuild
> and distributing source for OpenEJB and TranQL in the source tarball.
>
> Thanks,
> 	Aaron
>


Mime
View raw message