river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: VOTING ISSUE with apache-river-2.1.1-incubating
Date Wed, 26 Dec 2007 17:51:45 GMT
Hi Frank,

On Dec 26, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Frank Barnaby wrote:

> On Dec 24, 2007, at 06:23, Mark Brouwer wrote:
>> Hi Frank,
>> Frank Barnaby wrote:
>>> The top-level doc directory in the source release contains
>>> build.html, which provides a few instructions for building.  That
>>> location was sufficient when we did not provide a release-build
>>> target.  Now that such a target is available to the end users,
>>> however, the source release should also contain the build.html file.
>>> This issue also illuminates the need for a few other doc files to
>>> be added to the source sub-directory of the source release-bundle
>>> in support of end-user release builds.
>> Most OS projects I'm aware of have a BUILD(ING).txt for this  
>> purpose in the root, expectations are with many that there is a  
>> README and the aforementioned file in the root of the  
>> distribution. There is a build.html in the doc directory which is  
>> referred to from the index.html but I'm afraid I fall in the  
>> category that gives up easily too and resorts to its own  
>> interpretation of the build files based on 'ant -projecthelp'.  
>> Probably some more reorganization to bring it in line with common  
>> practices could be beneficial for the future.
> It seems like a JIRA issue should be created for the above
> items, but I don't think the release should be modified and/or
> delayed to address this issue.

I agree.

> Unless I hear otherwise, I'll move forward on the release with
> the added disclaimer and build fixes previously discussed.
> Also note that I'll be publishing the release candidate in my
> Apache People area:
> 	http://people.apache.org/~fbarnaby/river/2.1.1/
> Jim H, I have a copy of the now obsolete release-candidate:
> 	http://people.apache.org/~fbarnaby/river/2.1.1/obsolete/
> Please remove your copy to prevent any confusion.
> Frank
>>> The "javac-cmd" macro-def already contains "source=1.4", and I
>>> believe that option has been included since at least version 2.0.
>>> Am I missing something here?
>> No, it is me missing goggles and having a wrong understanding that
>> source="1.4" would make the warnings go away, while apparently the  
>> only
>> solution is to resort to 1.4.2 or remove enum from the source as  
>> will be
>> done as part of RIVER-212. Sorry for bringing this up here.
>>> Thank you--I appreciate the offer.  So far, the changes are simple
>>> enough for me to handle in short order.  In fact, most of the work
>>> is already complete.  Though, I would appreciate a review after I
>>> commit the changes and extra eyes to examine the resulting bundles.
>> Will do that.
>> -- 
>> Mark

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message