incubator-empire-db-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rainer Döbele <doeb...@esteam.de>
Subject re: ready for release?
Date Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:48:53 GMT
Hi everyone,

I found a litte problem:
For some reason the WTP-Eclipse plugin was commented out on the two struts2 web example projects
(empire-db-example-struts2 + empire-db-example-struts2-cxf).
I have commented them in and run mvn eclipse:eclipse.
For some reason the litte earth symbol that is usually on the top left of the project icon
for WTP Projects is not there, but I could choose "debug on server".
Then I found, that I got a "Class not found" error.
So I checked the Java EE Module dependencies and found that the dependencies were not selected.
I selected them but still got the error because for some reason it does not see to load the
empire-db-struts2 classes.

My questions:
1. Has anyone managed to run the two web samples projects?
2. What do we need to change that the run off the shelf?
3. Does anyone know whether there is a Maven plugin that's sets up the project for the use
with the tomcat sysdeo Eclipse plugin?

@Francis: About the wiki:
At the moment we have a rather static website.
I don't know whether or how to set up a wiki.
Sorry.



Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> Re: ready for release?
> 
> Ok that building.txt is kind of like our readme
> we also need some release task list and I need to look into releasing
> using meven on the apache infrastructure. I know they have a staging
> repository but I'm not sure incubator projects can use it.
> 
> Would it be hard to have a wiki set up for our project? Or is that
> planned for after incubation?
> 
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Francis De
> Brabandere<francisdb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Concerning the release there might be a difference for incubator
> > projects but I'll have a look at it tomorrow.
> >
> > As for the logging I don't care that the build logs a lot but it's
> not
> > that I'm against hiding the logging either
> >
> > Francis
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Rainer Döbele<doebele@esteam.de>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Francis,
> >>
> >> well I did it myself on my machine and I was just thinking about it.
> >> My personal opinion is, that I don't need log output from tests for
> every build - all I need to know is whether any of the tests failed at
> all. If so, I can investigate on this specific test.
> >> But it's a personal opinion.
> >> Write the log output to a file sounds like a good idea to me too.
> >>
> >> The next question is: Do we now put it up for voting or not.
> >> Is there anything else we can or must supply.
> >>
> >> Apache CXF has a nice document called "BUILDING.txt" that explains
> how to build with Maven.
> >> We could adapt this for our release.
> >>
> >> @Jörg are you still reading this. What's your opinion?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Rainer
> >>
> >> Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> >>> Re: logging of unit tests
> >>>
> >>> So I set the level to FATAL and put those parse warnings back to
> error
> >>> then? Should I convert the log4j settings to xml format?
> >>>
> >>> But if you are not interested in them maybe we can just log to a
> file
> >>> in the target folder instead of console?
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Rainer Döbele<doebele@esteam.de>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi Francis,
> >>> >
> >>> > thanks a lot.
> >>> > Now I can see where the properties for log4j are set.
> >>> > I didn't think about looking in src/test/resources - but its
> logical.
> >>> > Usually we use an embedded xml configuration instead of a
> properties
> >>> file.
> >>> >
> >>> > The output is much better, however I would even consider setting
> the
> >>> debug level to FATAL instead of WARN.
> >>> > The overall result is measured anyway and there is IMO not much
> >>> benefit in having the log output there.
> >>> > What do you think?
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards
> >>> > Rainer
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> >>> >> Re: revive the release process
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Changed those errors to warnings for logging since a default
> value
> >>> is
> >>> >> provided these are no real exceptions.
> >>> >> Also set the unit test default log level to WARN
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Let me know if this is ok, we could also keep them at error
> level
> >>> and
> >>> >> not provide the stack trace. I don't know of an option in log4j
> to
> >>> >> hide the traces
> >>> >>
> >>> >> What do you think?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Francis De
> >>> >> Brabandere<francisdb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> > Hi Rainer,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I'll have a look at the logging this evening.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Rainer
> Döbele<doebele@esteam.de>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >> >> Hi Francis (and everyone interested),
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> after it has been very quiet on the dev-mailing list
> recently, I
> >>> >> would like to revive the release process of empire-db 2.0.5 in
> order
> >>> to
> >>> >> be able to go ahead with some possibly bigger changes.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> The current assembly builds well and I as far as I can
tell
> all
> >>> >> required legal documents are there.
> >>> >> >> However, there is one thing that annoys me:
> >>> >> >> The JUnit test-code produces very verbose output - including
> some
> >>> >> exceptions.
> >>> >> >> Those exceptions are intended and handled properly - but
are
> >>> >> confusing.
> >>> >> >> @Francis: is there a way of disabling log output when
running
> the
> >>> >> unit tests?
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Apart from that the assembly is fine to me.
> >>> >> >> Anyone else to comment the assembly before we put it up
for
> >>> voting?
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Regards
> >>> >> >> Rainer
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > --
> >>> >> > http://www.somatik.be
> >>> >> > Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> http://www.somatik.be
> >>> >> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://www.somatik.be
> >>> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.somatik.be
> > Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> http://www.somatik.be
> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.

Mime
View raw message