geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <>
Subject Re: Continuous TCK Testing
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:39:14 GMT
Whoops... just realized that this was actually removed and I was looking at
a stickied revision of viewVC.  Nevermind.

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Jason Warner <> wrote:

> While we wait to hear back in regards to the license, I'm going to update
> the maven used in build-support.  The server now requires 2.0.9 and the
> version currently used by build support is 2.0.5.  I suppose we'll need to
> update ant, as well.  What version of ant should we be using?  1.7.1?
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Kevan Miller <>wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 2008, at 4:31 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
>> We had some suggestions earlier for some alternate means of implementing
>> this (Hudson, Conitnuum, etc...).  Now that we've had Jason Dillon provide
>> an overview of what we had in place before, does anyone have thoughts on
>> what we should go with?  I'm thinking we should stick with the AHP based
>> solution.  It will need to be updated most likely, but it's been tried and
>> tested and shown to meet our needs.  I'm wondering, though, why we stopped
>> using it before.  Was there a specific issue we're going to have to deal
>> with again?
>> IIRC, the overwhelming reason we stopped using it before was because of
>> hosting issues -- spotty networking, hardware failures, poor colo support,
>> etc. We shouldn't have any of these problems, now. If we do run into
>> problems, they should now be fixable. I have no reason to favor
>> Hudson/Continuum over AHP. So, if we can get AHP running easily, I'm all for
>> it. There's only one potential issue, that I'm aware of.
>> We previously had an Open Source License issued for our use of Anthill.
>> Here's some of the old discussion --
>> Although the board was aware of our usage of AntHill, since we weren't
>> running AntHill on ASF hardware, I'm not sure the license was fully vetted
>> by Infra. I don't see any issues, but I'll want to run this by Infra.
>> Jason D, will the existing license cover the version of AntHill that we'll
>> want to use? I'll run the license by Infra and will also describe the issue
>> for review by the Board, in our quarterly report.
>> IMO, I'd proceed with the assumption that we'll be using AHP. Just don't
>> install it on Apache hardware, yet.
>> I've requested a new license from Anthill. Will let you know when I get
>> it.
>> --kevan
> --
> ~Jason Warner

~Jason Warner

View raw message