Re: [vote] gump-related stuff
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: We should try to make it easier for gump to work with us. Our build system is a little hacky in that regard since it uses partial gump information to build cocoon. Gump strongly suggests people to move their gump descriptors over to the gump repository, so that all apache committers have access to it, not just cocoon committers. This increases the ability for others to fix the problems that we might introduce. At the same time, this is not possible, since our build depends on that *and* we can't svn:externalize it because the gump metadata is not (yet!) in SVN (we could get it from viewcvs, though, but it sounds hacky) So, the easiest thing is to allow gump committers to modify our 'gump.xml' files. So, issue #1: would you like to allow this? +1 - o - There is another issue: cocoon has unique packages that we only depend on and we place them in our gump.xml file, problem is that later on other projects might start using those and collisions might happen. Gump is not really happy when naming collisions happen (its datamodel is not namespaced, yet) so one way to do it better is to ask the gump folks to package the things we depend on directly. Means that its a little slower turnover. So, issue #2, would you like to ask the gump people to move our library dependencies currently in gump.xml over in the gump metadata repository instead? +1 /Daniel
Re: [vote] gump-related stuff
> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- > Von: Stefano Mazzocchi > Datum: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 08:37:25 -0400 > > So, the easiest thing is to allow gump committers to modify our > 'gump.xml' files. > > So, issue #1: would you like to allow this? +1 > So, issue #2, would you like to ask the gump people to move our library > dependencies currently in gump.xml over in the gump metadata repository > instead? +1 Why not? If we do not have to maintain them ... What should be the downsides? Joerg -- Weitersagen: GMX DSL-Flatrates mit Tempo-Garantie! Ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
Re: [vote] gump-related stuff
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: We should try to make it easier for gump to work with us. Our build system is a little hacky in that regard since it uses partial gump information to build cocoon. Gump strongly suggests people to move their gump descriptors over to the gump repository, so that all apache committers have access to it, not just cocoon committers. This increases the ability for others to fix the problems that we might introduce. At the same time, this is not possible, since our build depends on that *and* we can't svn:externalize it because the gump metadata is not (yet!) in SVN (we could get it from viewcvs, though, but it sounds hacky) So, the easiest thing is to allow gump committers to modify our 'gump.xml' files. So, issue #1: would you like to allow this? +1. Let's knowledged gumpers fix the descriptor when then find errors rather than having to send patches. - o - There is another issue: cocoon has unique packages that we only depend on and we place them in our gump.xml file, problem is that later on other projects might start using those and collisions might happen. Gump is not really happy when naming collisions happen (its datamodel is not namespaced, yet) so one way to do it better is to ask the gump folks to package the things we depend on directly. Means that its a little slower turnover. What does this mean concretely? That the libs we depend on will be managed at Gump? So, issue #2, would you like to ask the gump people to move our library dependencies currently in gump.xml over in the gump metadata repository instead? Don't know yet... Sylvain -- Sylvain WallezAnyware Technologies http://apache.org/~sylvainhttp://anyware-tech.com Apache Software Foundation Member Research & Technology Director
[vote] gump-related stuff
We should try to make it easier for gump to work with us. Our build system is a little hacky in that regard since it uses partial gump information to build cocoon. Gump strongly suggests people to move their gump descriptors over to the gump repository, so that all apache committers have access to it, not just cocoon committers. This increases the ability for others to fix the problems that we might introduce. At the same time, this is not possible, since our build depends on that *and* we can't svn:externalize it because the gump metadata is not (yet!) in SVN (we could get it from viewcvs, though, but it sounds hacky) So, the easiest thing is to allow gump committers to modify our 'gump.xml' files. So, issue #1: would you like to allow this? - o - There is another issue: cocoon has unique packages that we only depend on and we place them in our gump.xml file, problem is that later on other projects might start using those and collisions might happen. Gump is not really happy when naming collisions happen (its datamodel is not namespaced, yet) so one way to do it better is to ask the gump folks to package the things we depend on directly. Means that its a little slower turnover. So, issue #2, would you like to ask the gump people to move our library dependencies currently in gump.xml over in the gump metadata repository instead? -- Stefano.
