Ralph Goers wrote: > Upayavira wrote: > >> Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> >>> Reinhard Poetz wrote: >>> >>>> yes, according to the mails above sometime in the future it will work. >>>> >>>> - o - >>>> >>>> If somebody has time to fix gump.xml so that it builds at least >>>> cocoon-core it would be a good idea. If not, we should simply ask the >>>> Gump folks to remove the descriptor. >>>> >>>> WDOT? >>>> >>>> >>> Everytime gump breaks I find myself wondering why anybody cares? Can >>> someone educate me on what is better about gump then us running >>> Continuum? >>> >> >> Firstly, I am no expert on Gump. >> >> You can see Gump as more of a social thing - it not just related to our >> own pretty little project - it builds _everything_. It checks out trunk >> on a huge number of projects and builds them, thus ensuring that all >> projects continue to work together in their trunk versions. So think of >> it as one huge Continuum for _all_ Apache software and beyond, not just >> for Cocoon. >> >> As such, it will tell us if, for some reason, Cocoon wouldn't compile on >> Kaffe, or if one of our dependencies changed its interface and that >> broke our code. >> >> > How can that work? We specify the versions in the pom.xml. It will just > keep rebuilding the same thing until the pom is changed. I guess I'm > not sure how that even worked in the old system since we had all the jar > files in our own repository.
Heck, that's the point. Gump ignores specific versions and just builds against trunk for _everything_. That is the point of it - find out quickly if someone broke something. >> Cocoon is a fantastic project for the Gump people, because we have soooo >> many dependencies. If Cocoon builds, that means all of its dependencies, >> and their dependencies, etc, all built too, which as I understand it >> doesn't happen that often :-) >> >> > See the above comment. How does that happen if we still have the old > version? See above answer :-) >> So, yes, it is a valuable resource, but on a broader scale than just our >> own project. > Thanks. I sort of knew all that, but what I guess I'm missing is how it > actually does what you are saying it does. With a maven2 build how do > they "force" you to pick up the latest version (actually - I already > know the answer to that since I have a Jira bug opened on Maven 2 to do > just that. The answer is, you can't). Well, that's the Gump/Maven people's problem to solve, eh? Heck, I said I was no gump expert :-) Regards, Upayavira
