geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <jason.dil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Continuous TCK Testing
Date Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:35:24 GMT
I'd imagine we need to ask the AHP folks for  a new license.

--jason


On Oct 9, 2008, at 10:56 AM, 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 -- http://www.nabble.com/Geronimo-build-automation-status-(longish)-tt7649902.html#a7649902
>
> 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.
>
> --kevan


Mime
View raw message