I'm not saying there is only one developer, the core group just
represents the group doing the majority of the work in a time period.
That graph was the last few months in your new location.
It's just the natural evolution of projects.
I am actually trying to work with a developer who knows Hudson very
well to create a better bridge from Maven and Hudson. Basically using
Maven SCM (instead of the proliferation of Hudson plugins doing
exactly the same thing), creating a Plexus adapter so that I can use
all the Plexus components in Hudson, and bridge for Maven plugins into
Hudson. This will be my attempt to bridge the two worlds and give
Hudson first-class Maven support (some of it is honestly wonky).
I mean I'm not going to stop you guys from doing whatever with
Continuum I just find working with Hudson easier, and the setup here
has honestly never been overly stable. Life is short, I used what
works for the Maven 2.1 ITs.
On 18-Jul-08, at 9:35 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 17-Jul-08, at 11:12 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
I gather this is the reason that the commits (r677787 to r677789) for
the Maven Artifact release that Oleg just called a vote on look like
they were done by Jason?
I'm really not comfortable with svn credentials being shared like
that.
They are not being shared. Hudson is running as a sand-boxed user
where I
have setup my credentials, so that the releases can be fully
automated where
the same set of attributes are used across the board. I tested my
credentials, they work. The release plugin is not very graceful
when things
at the SVN bork. I was striving for a QA'd process so I took into
account
everything. The machine is secure and the account is secure. So now
that you
know that do you still think it's a problem?
FWIW, Continuum lets you enter your svn credentials when you do a
release, and uses those for the related commits.
It's not relevant to me what Continuum can or cannot do at this
point. The
community took a severe hit and Hudson has way more active
developers and
it's easier to develop features because it has an extensible API.
You can
look at the charts. The core group for Continuum consists of one
person:
"olamy". Contrast that with the core group in Hudson which is at
least 10
people.
Not totally right because we changed the svn repo. Old values are
there :
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Fmaven%2Fcontinuum
As you can see, Continuum doesn't have only one developer.
You are active on continuum like the majority of Hudson developers
and the
core group in Hudson is one developer too.
Just my 2 cents for some values that are totally out of topic!!!
Emmanuel
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Fcontinuum
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/HUDSON/search
So it's nice to say Continuum has this or that, but who's going to
fix it?
Kohsuke and company push out releases super frequently and
sometimes even
every week. There's just no comparison in my mind. I have limited
time I
simply can't afford to invest anything in Continuum. So for one
feature
Continuum might have I think what I have setup with the sandboxed
Hudson
user is a reasonable compromise. As a policy we can decide as a PMC
what's
acceptable but the setup I have is secure as far as I'm concerned.
Also I've had 7 people actually take the Hudson bundle and run the
Maven
2.1 ITs. That's never happened before and it's because Hudson is so
easy to
make a bundle, unpack it with the Maven jobs and boom you have a
fully
functional Maven environment.
--
Wendy
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:47 AM, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The rest of this release infrastructure has simply been
configuration of
hudson and nexus - nexus, to provide a staging ground for
releases - to
configure release jobs that deploy to this staging location
instead of
the
real release repository...just generalizing on configuration that
we all
have in our personal settings.xml files by now. Jason's
credentials are
used
for SVN and SSH where necessary, and I've created a new GPG key
for use
in
this CI system, then signed it with my own key. That key ID is:
84B54612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples.
Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without
actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one
is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by
looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more
examples
you look at, the more general your framework will be.
-- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
What matters is not ideas, but the people who have them. Good people
can fix bad ideas, but good ideas can't save bad people.
-- Paul Graham
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
