geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: openejb-2.2 tag is not buildable
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2006 03:44:51 GMT
On Dec 18, 2006, at 5:15 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>> I'm trying to build the OpenEJB 2.2 release so that I can continue  
>> working on Geronimo CTS/TCK automation... but the openejb-2.2  
>> release tag is not buildable in a clean environment:
>> [...]
>> I am not sure that this is a priority for many folks, but I hope  
>> that someday it will become more important in your eyes.
> As you know you don't need to build openejb-2.2 to do your CTS/TCK  
> testing.  You can build 1.2-beta or 2.0-m1 as Dain or Matt did when  
> they built those releases by adding this repo to your list  
> temporarily:

This requires a change to the source code, which I can not  
automate... and kinda defeats the purpose of the automated builds.

IMO relying on users to change the source in order to build a  
codeline is a serious flaw.

> But you're right, tags should be buildable.  As openejb depends on  
> geronimo and geronimo depends on openejb -- it's hard.  As you and  
> David J. have mentioned, it would be possible to:
>  1. release geronimo modules
>  2. release openejb
>  3. release geromimo applications, configs, and assemblies.
> But since we don't do that and I don't think anyone is willing to  
> propose it, someone has to release with an imperfect tag and  
> OpenEJB is always the one to fall on that sword.  It has nothing to  
> do with it not being important, that's just the compromise we make  
> until either 1. OpenEJB stops depending on Geronimo snapshots, 2.  
> Geronimo stops depending on OpenEJB snapshots, or 3. Geronimo  
> releases modules and "other" in serial with a wait period in the  
> middle for the OpenEJB release.

Okay, I understand that... though the deps on Genesis and xmlbeans-m- 
p are completely different.

> You already know that too and I'm just reiterating what we've all  
> gone over before.  My perspective is we need a bit of 1, 2 and 3.

Ya, would be better in this case to have G split up into components  
and assemblies, and release them separately... that is how I had to  
model it for automated builds.

> In the meantime comments like "I hope that someday it will become  
> more important in your eyes" don't sit well with me.

Sorry... though I think that we could have all done a better job at  
this if we had more longer term perspective... though I realize that  
given the circumstances that some corners needed to be cut to  
actually move forward.

> So, the here and now:  It's poor form to update tags, but it's also  
> poor form to release stuff with snapshots, so I went with  
> (hopefully) the lesser of the two evils and updated the tag.
> geronimo.*:  1.2-SNAPSHOT -> 1.2-beta
> tools-maven-plugin:  1.1-SNAPSHOT -> 1.1
> Fair warning, the tag will still not build due to the missing  
> geronimo dependencies.  Geronimo 1.2-beta is waiting on OpenEJB 2.2  
> to be released.
> As you also know, you can add this repo to your list temporarily to  
> build:
> Hope this helps,

Thanks... though I hope we can avoid this in the future if  
possible... needing modify source to add these repos really does not  
help me when working from automated builds.  It should have been  
possible to change each branch to use the right dependencies, then  
build them in order and produce a functional system... and a  
repeatable build.   Inclusion of snapshots and split of specs to many  
branches has simply made it more difficult to make a reproducible build.


View raw message