geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r437291 - in /geronimo/server/trunk: bootstrap bootstrap.bat bootstrap.xml
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 19:54:13 GMT
I give up trying to explain... do as you please.

--jason


On Sep 1, 2006, at 12:48 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:

> inline..
>
> --- Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:42 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>
>> Anita, why do you always bring this up when there is talk about
>> bootstrap?
>
>  Because when people are using bootstrap, it is not very obvious what
> is going on. It is much simpler to give the 3 URLs and a simple build
> command mvn. If there are build/test failures, they can look at the
> default profile, and see what they are building. If for example the
> openejb2 test failed, they could simply do
>> cd openejb2  and
>> mvn -Dmaven.test.skip=true
> After this they can continue the build from the next step, i.e.
> configs, etc.
>
>> I have explained over and over and over again that the
>> point of bootstrap is not to facilitate a normal build but to ensure
>
> People only care about the normal build.
>
>>
>> that the build works from a known state (ie. clean, fresh specs, from
>>
>> openejb2).  Your method does not provide this level of assurance.  I
>
> You have not given any concrete example/scenario in which my build
> method does not work.
>
>>
>> created this script because people had problems checking things out
>> in the right place,
>
> Is this the main reason?
>
>> cleaning the right bits and running the right mvn
>
>   Could you be more precise?
>
>>
>> commands to perform the build steps that were needed to help ensure
>> that most everyone (except for some folks with whacky windows
>> machines) can make a reliable build near 100% of the time.
>>
>> I'm really kinda getting tired of having to re-explain this.
>>
>>
>>> To build geronimo with openejb2 add openejb2 to the default profile
>> in
>>> the top level pom.xml as shown below:
>>>            <modules>
>>>                 <module>modules</module>
>>>                 <module>maven-plugins</module>
>>>                 <module>applications</module>
>>>                 <module>openejb2</module>
>> <-------
>>>                 <module>configs</module>
>>>                 <module>assemblies</module>
>>>             </modules>
>>>     and
>>
>> No, no, no, no... no... no.  We had already talked about this weeks
>> ago.  Its fine that you want to build in this manner, but I am firmly
>>
>> against putting a module into the main build that is for a directory
>>
>> that the user must checkout by hand.
>
>    I do not see any problems with that. Let us give people a choice by
> putting these instructions on the wiki and they can decide if they  
> want
> to use bootstrap. BTW, it is in line with your philosophy about  
> builds:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Unable-to-build-using-m2-p5074204.html
>
>>
>>
>>>> cd ..
>>>> mvn
>>>    After the first time you can build from any directory.
>>>
>>>     Please give it a try and provide feedback, so that we can put
>>> bootstrap to rest.
>>
>> I don't have any problems with you, or anyone else making changes to
>>
>> include openejb2 in their local workspace (I'd recommend putting that
>>
>> into a profiles.xml next to the pom.xml though).  But I think that
>> your method is unacceptable for the project default.
>>
>> Bootstrap is there for a reason... I am not crazy, I actually know
>> what I am doing.
>>
>> At this point I believe that bootstrap is important and needs to
>> remain, until the items I previously listed are resolved.
>
>    I am not asking you to remove the bootstrap, I want to give our
> users a choice.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com


Mime
View raw message