Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of paulmcmahan@gmail.com designates
 66.249.92.172 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=gH1rlK+Ibj2fetiOwy9K9E7+4/oq7cewd8Bt59Jx8CwnyqhC762onMhR9QMVFo6sRNHszA4q31hb6eYZ6tuLB7LrzDMQA6KM3mbgUQrtB1nTcyQ565IRjMzyxGT5wtsYpUPPCIeYE5giZRpO3j+HC3KfNzVTSXvwsNISNacsrsQ=
Message-ID: <21df75940609050734w585542b5r28389dafdca1824f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 10:34:42 -0400
From: "Paul McMahan" <paulmcmahan@gmail.com>
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r437291 - in /geronimo/server/trunk: bootstrap
 bootstrap.bat bootstrap.xml
In-Reply-To: <8C483018-0B84-4953-AA65-0A8DEDE5C168@planet57.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20060901194837.63552.qmail@web31711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	 <8C483018-0B84-4953-AA65-0A8DEDE5C168@planet57.com>

I am in favor of keeping bootstrap around for automating the several
steps it takes to check out and build the server into one command.  I
agree with Anita that there should be instructions for advanced users
on the wiki for building without bootstrap -- I have already found her
advice very helpful for working around some problems.  But for the
default build environment (i.e. what a new user sees when checking out
from SVN and then reads about in BUILDING.txt) I think we should stay
the course for resolving the problems Jason listed before removing
bootstrap.  My rationale is that fewer manual steps means fewer
chances for user error.

Best wishes,
Paul

On 9/1/06, Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com> wrote:
> 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
>
>