I don't care, if we can do than with Buildbot and if we are happy with
leave, not need to change

JLouis

2012/6/22 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>

> s/ck/k/
>
> buildbot can (it is far more powerful than jenkins)
>
> but i agree jenkins is more user friendly and enough for us --> another
> poll?
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/22 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>
>
> > If the reason is just because buildbot is not able to link builds, we
> could
> > rely more on Jenckins.
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/22 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
> >
> > > arquillian-tomee is no more on trunk ;)
> > >
> > >
> > > while we keep a great CI (we have to link builds) +1
> > >
> > > - Romain
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/6/22 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > > Hi again,
> > > >
> > > > After digging into the code and discussion with Romain, I'd like to
> > > raise a
> > > > question. Any feedback is welcome.
> > > > We have been adding new modules and new features for months in the
> > > project.
> > > >
> > > > It works great, but the build is heavy and difficult to manage,
> > > especially
> > > > when the release process starts. Thanks to David's set of tools,
> that's
> > > > easier, but still an heavy task.
> > > >
> > > > We have the same versioning and the same life-cycle for all modules
> > > whereas
> > > > IMHO, some of them could have a different release life-cycle and get
> > > > released more frequently.
> > > >
> > > > For instance, we have:
> > > > arquillian
> > > > arquillian-tomee
> > > > assembly
> > > > classes
> > > > container
> > > > deps
> > > > examples
> > > > itests
> > > > LICENSE
> > > > maven
> > > > NOTICE
> > > > openejb.iml
> > > > osgi
> > > > osgi-notes.txt
> > > > pom.xml
> > > > rat.xml
> > > > server
> > > > src
> > > > target
> > > > tck
> > > > test-output.xml
> > > > tomee
> > > > utils
> > > >
> > > > IMHO, we could get out and get different life cycle for:
> > > > Arquillian
> > > > OSGi
> > > > TomEE
> > > > Maven
> > > > Examples?
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to