Hi all, @Janne: I think these are two different topics that shouldn't be mixed up. Seems what's lacking are things like a road map, documentation and more or less clear development tasks for new contributors. That way it would be easier for people to join the project. So far, the development process has been working because the "big" contributors were able to do major parts on their own. That has changed, and that's the reason why the development process has been slowing down IMO. The code base is not that small anymore, so it's quite hard for a newbie to continue working on bigger points someone else has begun.
@Dave: Thanks for clarifying that different way of repository management. However, I guess the way the code is used was different in your projects: I assume you had a code base and several projects using it. Each project has its own modifications and extensions, based on project specific requirements. In the end, you can have a look at them and judge what is worth merging with the trunk, i.e. what is assumed to be valuable for future projects. Is that correct? Regards Florian ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- Von: "Janne Jalkanen" <[email protected]> An: [email protected] CC: "Harry Metske" <[email protected]> Gesendet: Freitag, 11. März 2011 23:56:49 Betreff: Re: Releasing 3.0.0-alpha... Well, based on the amount of commits I would say that the current development process doesn't work :-/. That's why I don't really care - if you're willing to do the work, branch all you want! :-D /Janne On Mar 11, 2011, at 15:32 , Dave Wolf wrote: > @Janne: I was simply answering Florian's question as to my reasoning for the > development trunk. Obviously, the current develop process works and so we > shouldn't change it and I do agree with you regarding the merging, > definitively a PITA. > > Dave Wolf > > "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a life that > is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Janne Jalkanen > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> If you really want, go ahead, - but be aware that all of our automated >> build systems assume trunk. Also, merging stuff with svn is a real PITA, >> which is why I'd like to avoid the creation of new branches. >> >> /Janne >> >> On 11 Mar 2011, at 07:03, Dave Wolf wrote: >> >>> @Florian: Having a branch for development work really puts a strong focus >> on >>> what will be included in the associated release and the trunk remains the >>> overall code repository. At the end of the release, tags are created as >>> appropriate and the branch is merged into the trunk. Either way will >> work. >>> In the organizations where I've worked over the past few years, we've >> only >>> performed our development work in release / functionality specific >> branches. >>> >>> >>> @Janne: Shall I create saved-src/WebContent/.. & >> saved-tests/WebContent/... >>> directories for the two JSPs (FCK.jsp & TestMigratorForm.jsp)? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave Wolf >>> >>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a life >> that >>> is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Janne Jalkanen < >> [email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Sure, the more stuff we can get rid off the better. But I'd still keep >> it >>>> in the trunk. >>>> >>>> /Janne >>>> >>>> On 9 Mar 2011, at 16:04, Dave Wolf wrote: >>>> >>>>> Maybe we should move classes, JSPs, etc that are not part of the >>>> supported >>>>> part of the release under a "saved-src" directory. That way it will be >>>>> easier for new developers to know what is in / out and plus it might >>>> reduce >>>>> the scope when debugging. >>>>> >>>>> Another thought, should we create a 3.0 branch and then merge back to >> the >>>>> truck after 3.0 is working and out? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Dave Wolf >>>>> H: 303-377-9537 >>>>> M: 303-956-9106 >>>>> >>>>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a life >>>> that >>>>> is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Harry Metske <[email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dave, >>>>>> >>>>>> you are correct, I saw that same JSP compile error (at least the first >>>>>> one). >>>>>> I'm not sure but there have been discussions on the inclusion of a >>>> wysiwyg >>>>>> editor that were not resolved yet. >>>>>> So FCK is probably not considered part of core JSPWiki until someone >> is >>>>>> willing to give some support on it. >>>>>> JSPWiki can work without it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have not seen the error in TestMigratorForm.jsp (I think I have >>>> ignored >>>>>> it). >>>>>> I did run the unit tests: >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~metskem/tests/junit-noframes.html >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, >>>>>> Harry >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2011/3/9 Dave Wolf <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> As far as I can tell these are legitimate compilation errors. Is it >>>>>>> possible >>>>>>> that the jsp compilation doesn't have FCK.jsp in its path? I can >>>>>> certainly >>>>>>> understand why you might wouldn't pre-compile the test JSPs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The first issue is is in templates/default/editors/FCK.jsp, line 51: >>>>>>> TemplateManager.addResourceRequest( context, "script", >>>>>>> "scripts/fckeditor/fckeditor.js" ); >>>>>>> The method addResourceRequest doesn't appear to be in TemplateManager >>>>>> (nor >>>>>>> its parent: ModuleManager). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The next issue is in tests/etc/TestMigratorForm.jsp, line 25: >>>>>>> It is referencing a non-existent page >>>>>> (templates/default/LoginContent.jsp) >>>>>>> or at least it is non-existing in the trunk. It existed in the 2.8 >>>> branch >>>>>>> tho. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The third issue was an eclipse configuration issue, which I've fixed >>>> for >>>>>> my >>>>>>> environment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Dave Wolf >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a >> life >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Janne Jalkanen < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My trunk works, btw - could be that there's some hidden setup that >>>>>>> happens >>>>>>>> to be on my machine but not yours? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> /Janne >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 20:30 , Harry Metske wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dave, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> as far as I know there is nothing missing, can you be a bit more >>>>>>> specific >>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>> Running "ant war" on the trunk (v3.0.0-svn-224) gives me a proper >> war >>>>>>>> file, >>>>>>>>> that I can deploy on Tomcat and I can point my browser to the >> JSPWiki >>>>>>>> URL. >>>>>>>>> (after that it stops, because the trunk is simple not working). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Running the junit tests gives me 2 failures and 1 error (out of >> 1029 >>>>>>>> tests). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> regards, >>>>>>>>> Harry >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2011/3/8 Dave Wolf <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are there some files that need to be checked in? There were >> several >>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>>>> errors. it appears that LoginContext.jsp is missing or the >> reference >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>> is out of date. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dave Wolf >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a >>>>>>> life >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Florian Holeczek < >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dave, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> the correct one is the trunk ;-) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> Florian >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- >>>>>>>>>>> Von: "Dave Wolf" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> An: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> CC: "Florian Holeczek" <[email protected]>, "Janne Jalkanen" < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. März 2011 05:32:16 >>>>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: Releasing 3.0.0-alpha... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hey Florian, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! I'm glad to help out however I can. I thought maybe I'd >>>>>> work >>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>> getting the unit tests to work. So, I checked out the 2.8 branch >> -- >>>>>>>> looks >>>>>>>>>>> like I should have gone for either the stripes or jcr branch >>>>>> instead. >>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>> just noticed that the package listed in the test report attached >> to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> JIRA >>>>>>>>>>> is the new org.apache.wiki.* package -- obviously not a match >> with >>>>>>> 2.8. >>>>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>> base. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if I'm looking at the right Subversion repository? It >>>>>> seems >>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>> JIRA that there isn't much to do prior to releasing a v 3.0 alpha >>>>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>>> Is there another branch somewhere that I'm missing? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dave Wolf >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for >> a >>>>>>> life >>>>>>>>>>> that is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson >>>>>>> Mandela >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Florian Holeczek < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dave, and welcome back! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Happy to read that there are some people willing to contribute. >>>>>> Seems >>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>> there's still lack of people who can coordinate the release, as >>>>>> Janne >>>>>>>>>>> describes it. Well, never done that before, but I would be ready >> to >>>>>>> try >>>>>>>>>> ;) >>>>>>>>>>> Can't be that hard, since Apache's documentation seems to be >> quite >>>>>>>> good. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm not very deep into the codebase, but I can at least give a >> top >>>>>>>> level >>>>>>>>>>> view. The two major changes in 3.0 are >>>>>>>>>>> * front end uses the Stripes framework, mainly done by Andrew >>>>>>>>>>> * back end uses the Java Content Repository interface (JSR-170), >>>>>>> mainly >>>>>>>>>>> done by Janne >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Guess the easiest way to start is to dig into the codebase and >> have >>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> look >>>>>>>>>>> at the open JIRA issues. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> Florian >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- >>>>>>>>>>> Von: "Dave Wolf" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>> An: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> CC: "Janne Jalkanen" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>> Gesendet: Montag, 7. März 2011 02:28:57 >>>>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: Releasing 3.0.0-alpha... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would be willing to get involved again and contribute to the >> code >>>>>>>> base. >>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the late response, I've been away for a while ('er >> years) >>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>>> had the messages getting filtered. I should have a bit of time to >>>>>>>> devote >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> JSPWiki. I'm pretty far out of the loop tho. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What (Java) issues might I focus on first? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>> Dave Wolf >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for >> a >>>>>>> life >>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> is less than the one you are capable of living." --Nelson Mandela >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Janne Jalkanen >>>>>>>>>>> < [email protected] >wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2010, at 08:38 , Henri Yandell wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So ignoring some paperwork, it seems that the only thing >> blocking >>>>>>> TLP >>>>>>>>>>>>> is a release, and the only thing blocking a release (in JIRA) >> is >>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> set >>>>>>>>>>>>> of failing unit tests. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.0 is quite useless atm though... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Also, since our community seems a bit subdued these days (I >>>>>> believe >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> current committers have other responsibilities weighing heavily >> on >>>>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>>>> shoulders), who would volunteer to run through the release >>>>>> process? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This would be a good time for people to step up and say if they >>>>>> have >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>> continued interest in JSPWiki and are willing to help. We need >>>>>>> people >>>>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>>>>>> can coordinate the release, and others who are willing to >>>>>> contribute >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> codebase. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> /Janne >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
