logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Curt Arnold <carn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Official Builds
Date Thu, 19 May 2005 23:09:58 GMT
I subscribe to the Gump list and there has been chatter that I'm not  
sure I'm interpreting correctly, but it appears that the main Gump  
server "Brutus" is being redeployed so Gump will be off-line for a  
few days and will be reborn running on a VM somewhere.

Gump wouldn't be appropriate for release builds since our  
dependencies would be on a current snapshot of, for example, jakarta- 
oro and not a particular released version.

Having a dedicated VM for builds would be useful.  Particularly if we  
are able to share the VM image.  Might be good to ask on the Gump  
list to see if they have any thoughts or recommendations.


On May 19, 2005, at 5:47 PM, Paul Smith wrote:

> I like the idea of a dedicated build mechanism. While I'm not sure  
> how I would use the same mechanism for Chainsaw because of the code- 
> signing requirement, it is _so_ easy to miss a dependent jar and  
> create a build that misses JMS or something.  I'd run out of  
> fingers if I tried to count the number of times I did that when  
> making a distro for Chainsaw.... :)
>
> It's also easy to accidently compile with JDK 5.0 or something.   
> I'd much prefer it built with a stringent JDK requirement that  
> matches what we're targeting.
>
> Paul


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


Mime
View raw message