From: "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > James Strachan wrote: > > From: "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >>Hello, > >> > >>I'm curious what is currently the most stable release of Jelly? I > >>checked out the cvs tree and tries to build it, but it seems to break on > >>certain dependencies. > > > > > > It shouldn't do. Are you using Maven to build it? What problems did you > > find - it should all just work. > > > > > [javac] > /root/CVS_ROOT/jakarta-commons-sandbox/jelly/src/java/org/apache/commons/jel ly/tags/core/NewTag.java:67: > cannot resolve symbol > [javac] symbol : class ConstructorUtils > [javac] location: package beanutils > [javac] import org.apache.commons.beanutils.ConstructorUtils; > [javac] ^ > [javac] > /root/CVS_ROOT/jakarta-commons-sandbox/jelly/src/java/org/apache/commons/jel ly/tags/core/NewTag.java:127: > cannot resolve symbol > [javac] symbol : variable ConstructorUtils > [javac] location: class org.apache.commons.jelly.tags.core.NewTag > [javac] object = > ConstructorUtils.invokeConstructor(theClass,values,types); > [javac] ^ > [javac] 2 errors > > BUILD FAILED > file:/root/CVS_ROOT/jakarta-commons-sandbox/jelly/build.xml:34: Compile > failed; see the compiler error output for details.
This looks like you've got an old version of commons-beanutils. Wierd, Maven should have automatically reloaded this for you If you delete the jars in $MAVEN_HOME/repository/commmons-beanutils/jars and do another build it should work fine I think BTW which Maven version is this? > >>I'd like to begin experimenting with Jelly as a > >>Mathematical Simulation tool, not neccessarily as a developer, so I'd > >>like a pretty stable release thats going to not be too buggy. > > > > > > Its pretty stable - its been used in various projects such as Maven for > > quite some time. Though we do really need to get a release out soon so folks > > can depend on a formal release. Until now you could depend on a snapshot > > build from here... > > > > http://www.ibiblio.org/maven/commons-jelly/jars/ > > > > > This is helpfull, but there are a great number of versions (nightly > builds?, beta N's, dev branchs) which is the best to use? The latest :-) > For my experience working with other jakarta commons projects, its often > hard to judge what the best release (formal or informal) to use is. Totally agree and understand. > I definitly agree with the release thread going on now. For Jelly to be > of use to the common user, there needs to be stable release points they > can reley on. If their own work is based on the bleeding edge of the > development branch it will create much suffering for them. This is > because the HEAD branch cycles between states of stablity/unstability as > development progresses. Depending on when they checkout the cvs, they > could be grabbing from anywhere in cycle. Agreed. > Another question, do you have a current timeline for releasing 1.0? Not right now no. If its any help, I don't expect much in the way of code changes between now and 1.0 and certainly the API should remain pretty consistent - I think its mostly gonna be documentation & packaging issues. James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
