Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Bruno Busco
Thank you Adam,
unfortunately I am not familiar with debian packages yet (consider
that I normally work under Windows).

In any case, what was my original goal, was to define some script or
whatever that could generate, starting from a fresh complete OFBiz
checkout, a modified OFBiz tree that could be used to build a partial
OFBiz configuration.

The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply some
SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
files).

I think that having these scripts in the SVN tree and using them in
the BuildBot to get these additional builds could help us to gradually
reduce components dependencies.

Should we simply add some more ant targets? It seems that ant can do
the job and works both on Linux and Windows.

-Bruno

2010/1/1 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:
 Bruno Busco wrote:
 Hi Adam,
 thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
 How should I use the debian package?
 What is intended for?

 I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
 deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?

 Sorry for this basic questions.

 Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
 version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.

 debian/rules clean
 debian/rules binary

 Install debs that get created in ..

 There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git branch
 that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to be added.

 The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
 versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.




Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Jacopo Cappellato
Instead of deleting folders the script could set the enabled=false attribute 
in the ofbiz-component.xml files.

Jacopo

On Jan 2, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:

 Thank you Adam,
 unfortunately I am not familiar with debian packages yet (consider
 that I normally work under Windows).
 
 In any case, what was my original goal, was to define some script or
 whatever that could generate, starting from a fresh complete OFBiz
 checkout, a modified OFBiz tree that could be used to build a partial
 OFBiz configuration.
 
 The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply some
 SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
 files).
 
 I think that having these scripts in the SVN tree and using them in
 the BuildBot to get these additional builds could help us to gradually
 reduce components dependencies.
 
 Should we simply add some more ant targets? It seems that ant can do
 the job and works both on Linux and Windows.
 
 -Bruno
 
 2010/1/1 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:
 Bruno Busco wrote:
 Hi Adam,
 thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
 How should I use the debian package?
 What is intended for?
 
 I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
 deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?
 
 Sorry for this basic questions.
 
 Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
 version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.
 
 debian/rules clean
 debian/rules binary
 
 Install debs that get created in ..
 
 There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git branch
 that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to be added.
 
 The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
 versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.
 
 



Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Adam Heath
Bruno Busco wrote:
 The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply some
 SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
 files).

Actually, that's not the best approach.  It would be better to modify
the build.xml and java classes to be more extensible, and not
hard-code things into framework/base/config/ofbiz-components.xml, that
reference hard-coded classes located in other components.(for example).

I'd love to be able to drop a component-into hot-deploy, and have a
new container automatically started.  This would make switching
between jetty and catalina simpler, and would allow for an asterisk
component(which requires constantly running code).



Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Bruno Busco
This is OK for the runtime but will still make available all the
packages during the build process.
Some unwanted java code dependencies would not be spotted out.

-Bruno

2010/1/2 Jacopo Cappellato jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com:
 Instead of deleting folders the script could set the enabled=false 
 attribute in the ofbiz-component.xml files.

 Jacopo

 On Jan 2, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:

 Thank you Adam,
 unfortunately I am not familiar with debian packages yet (consider
 that I normally work under Windows).

 In any case, what was my original goal, was to define some script or
 whatever that could generate, starting from a fresh complete OFBiz
 checkout, a modified OFBiz tree that could be used to build a partial
 OFBiz configuration.

 The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply some
 SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
 files).

 I think that having these scripts in the SVN tree and using them in
 the BuildBot to get these additional builds could help us to gradually
 reduce components dependencies.

 Should we simply add some more ant targets? It seems that ant can do
 the job and works both on Linux and Windows.

 -Bruno

 2010/1/1 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:
 Bruno Busco wrote:
 Hi Adam,
 thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
 How should I use the debian package?
 What is intended for?

 I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
 deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?

 Sorry for this basic questions.

 Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
 version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.

 debian/rules clean
 debian/rules binary

 Install debs that get created in ..

 There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git branch
 that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to be added.

 The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
 versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.






Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Scott Gray
Doesn't the build order prevent this?  If one were to try and add a  
java dependency from the framework to the applications then the build  
would fail would it not?


While it is certainly possible, I'm entirely convinced of the need to  
use buildbot for this.  The reason buildbot is great for the tests is  
because it is so easy to unwittingly break them yet difficult to track  
down and fix after the fact.


With component dependencies all that is really required is a firm  
understanding by all committers of what the dependencies are and why  
they should be enforced.  I really think it's easy to avoid creating  
dependency problems by simply being aware of them and for the most  
part they are pretty easy to spot and to fix.  I would suggest that  
the main reason there are problems right now is because no one is  
making enough noise about the dependencies not being enforced.


Additionally, there is no point setting up a buildbot process that is  
going to fail so the dependencies would need to be fixed before this  
discussion can really come to any sort of resolution.  At that point  
the community may wish to consider completely separating the framework  
and applications as sub projects and if that happened then we'd need  
to setup completely different buildbot processes and the dependency  
issue would become somewhat irrelevant by complete separation.


Regards
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 2/01/2010, at 11:31 PM, Bruno Busco wrote:


This is OK for the runtime but will still make available all the
packages during the build process.
Some unwanted java code dependencies would not be spotted out.

-Bruno

2010/1/2 Jacopo Cappellato jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com:
Instead of deleting folders the script could set the  
enabled=false attribute in the ofbiz-component.xml files.


Jacopo

On Jan 2, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:


Thank you Adam,
unfortunately I am not familiar with debian packages yet (consider
that I normally work under Windows).

In any case, what was my original goal, was to define some script or
whatever that could generate, starting from a fresh complete OFBiz
checkout, a modified OFBiz tree that could be used to build a  
partial

OFBiz configuration.

The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply  
some

SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
files).

I think that having these scripts in the SVN tree and using them in
the BuildBot to get these additional builds could help us to  
gradually

reduce components dependencies.

Should we simply add some more ant targets? It seems that ant can do
the job and works both on Linux and Windows.

-Bruno

2010/1/1 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:

Bruno Busco wrote:

Hi Adam,
thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
How should I use the debian package?
What is intended for?

I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?

Sorry for this basic questions.


Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.

debian/rules clean
debian/rules binary

Install debs that get created in ..

There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git  
branch
that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to  
be added.


The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.









smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-02 Thread Bruno Busco
Scott,
if I proposed the BuildBot to be setup to check for the dependencies
is because I do not think that making noise about this is enough.
Framework separation is something we speak about since a lot of time
but no steps have been done because, I guess, it is not a community
high priority, but, only a wish.

Setting the BuildBot will:
1) make all aware of what really means for the community the
framework-only installation. We will start with a certain component
set installed, we will then discuss if this or that application should
be included or not and then we will end with a final decision.
2) for sure we will have a failed build at the beginning but we will
also have clear what are the dependence issues and all community can
work to reduce them (or at least to not increase theme)
3) when the framework-only build will be ok we could use the BuildBot
to daily build, test and package as we do with the complete OFBiz.

-Bruno

2010/1/2 Scott Gray scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com:
 Doesn't the build order prevent this?  If one were to try and add a java
 dependency from the framework to the applications then the build would fail
 would it not?

 While it is certainly possible, I'm entirely convinced of the need to use
 buildbot for this.  The reason buildbot is great for the tests is because it
 is so easy to unwittingly break them yet difficult to track down and fix
 after the fact.

 With component dependencies all that is really required is a firm
 understanding by all committers of what the dependencies are and why they
 should be enforced.  I really think it's easy to avoid creating dependency
 problems by simply being aware of them and for the most part they are pretty
 easy to spot and to fix.  I would suggest that the main reason there are
 problems right now is because no one is making enough noise about the
 dependencies not being enforced.

 Additionally, there is no point setting up a buildbot process that is going
 to fail so the dependencies would need to be fixed before this discussion
 can really come to any sort of resolution.  At that point the community may
 wish to consider completely separating the framework and applications as sub
 projects and if that happened then we'd need to setup completely different
 buildbot processes and the dependency issue would become somewhat irrelevant
 by complete separation.

 Regards
 Scott

 HotWax Media
 http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

 On 2/01/2010, at 11:31 PM, Bruno Busco wrote:

 This is OK for the runtime but will still make available all the
 packages during the build process.
 Some unwanted java code dependencies would not be spotted out.

 -Bruno

 2010/1/2 Jacopo Cappellato jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com:

 Instead of deleting folders the script could set the enabled=false
 attribute in the ofbiz-component.xml files.

 Jacopo

 On Jan 2, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:

 Thank you Adam,
 unfortunately I am not familiar with debian packages yet (consider
 that I normally work under Windows).

 In any case, what was my original goal, was to define some script or
 whatever that could generate, starting from a fresh complete OFBiz
 checkout, a modified OFBiz tree that could be used to build a partial
 OFBiz configuration.

 The script should be able to delete some directories and to apply some
 SVN patches (tipically to change component-load.xml and build.xml
 files).

 I think that having these scripts in the SVN tree and using them in
 the BuildBot to get these additional builds could help us to gradually
 reduce components dependencies.

 Should we simply add some more ant targets? It seems that ant can do
 the job and works both on Linux and Windows.

 -Bruno

 2010/1/1 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:

 Bruno Busco wrote:

 Hi Adam,
 thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
 How should I use the debian package?
 What is intended for?

 I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
 deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?

 Sorry for this basic questions.

 Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
 version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.

 debian/rules clean
 debian/rules binary

 Install debs that get created in ..

 There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git branch
 that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to be
 added.

 The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
 versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.








Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-01 Thread Bruno Busco
Hi Adam,
thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
How should I use the debian package?
What is intended for?

I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?

Sorry for this basic questions.

-Bruno


2009/12/31 Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com:
 Bruno Busco wrote:
 How could we define new ant targets to deploy partial OFBiz configurations?

 I mean, an OFBiz configuration I would like to build and get working
 is the one with the following applications:

 - application/commonext
 - application/content
 - application/party
 - application/securityext
 - specialpurpose/myportal
 - specialpurpose/ofbizwebsite

 Does make sense to define a new ant target that removes all other
 directories and then build what remains?
 This new ant target could be executed in the BuildBot also.

 For reference, the debian packages have a
 -framework/-applications/-specialpurpose split.  I'd like to be able
 to split each application and specialpurpose component into it's own
 package, tho, and use dependencies/etc to bring them all back
 together.  However, the components still aren't 100% separated yet.




Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2010-01-01 Thread Adam Heath
Bruno Busco wrote:
 Hi Adam,
 thank you for the hint but I need some other (basic) information.
 How should I use the debian package?
 What is intended for?
 
 I see a .pl script. Can I use it to get a partial (framework-only)
 deploy directory from a checked out OFBiz working directory ?
 
 Sorry for this basic questions.

Update the debian/changelog, to at least contain the current svn
version. Update the date.  Do this by making a new stanza.

debian/rules clean
debian/rules binary

Install debs that get created in ..

There may be a few things that don't work, I've got a local git branch
that has a few very small improvements in debian/* that need to be added.

The packages do *not* support upgrades between different ofbiz
versions, because ofbiz doesn't support that itself.



Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2009-12-31 Thread Bruno Busco
How could we define new ant targets to deploy partial OFBiz configurations?

I mean, an OFBiz configuration I would like to build and get working
is the one with the following applications:

- application/commonext
- application/content
- application/party
- application/securityext
- specialpurpose/myportal
- specialpurpose/ofbizwebsite

Does make sense to define a new ant target that removes all other
directories and then build what remains?
This new ant target could be executed in the BuildBot also.

-Bruno


2009/12/30 Bruno Busco bruno.bu...@gmail.com:
 Hi devs,
 I am trying to remove some OFBiz components but even removing few
 specialpurpose components make the build or the data loading
 impossible.
 I think we need to gain back the components independence in a controlled way.
 Even reviewing commits is not so easy to detect that a change
 introduce a wrong dependence and then, when you try to separate things
 its a complete mess.

 What about to start a process that will take us to have a set of
 different OFBiz configurations to be all built on BuildBot to be sure
 that no wrong dependence has been introduced?

 The first thing to do would be to agree to a dependence tree we want to 
 rispect.
 Then we could define one or more partial OFBiz configuration that
 should work according to the approved dependence tree.
 Then we could setup BuildBot to automatically build them for us.

 Whet do you think about?

 Thank you,
 -Bruno



Re: Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2009-12-31 Thread Adam Heath
Bruno Busco wrote:
 How could we define new ant targets to deploy partial OFBiz configurations?
 
 I mean, an OFBiz configuration I would like to build and get working
 is the one with the following applications:
 
 - application/commonext
 - application/content
 - application/party
 - application/securityext
 - specialpurpose/myportal
 - specialpurpose/ofbizwebsite
 
 Does make sense to define a new ant target that removes all other
 directories and then build what remains?
 This new ant target could be executed in the BuildBot also.

For reference, the debian packages have a
-framework/-applications/-specialpurpose split.  I'd like to be able
to split each application and specialpurpose component into it's own
package, tho, and use dependencies/etc to bring them all back
together.  However, the components still aren't 100% separated yet.



Discussion: BuildBot component independence check

2009-12-30 Thread Bruno Busco
Hi devs,
I am trying to remove some OFBiz components but even removing few
specialpurpose components make the build or the data loading
impossible.
I think we need to gain back the components independence in a controlled way.
Even reviewing commits is not so easy to detect that a change
introduce a wrong dependence and then, when you try to separate things
its a complete mess.

What about to start a process that will take us to have a set of
different OFBiz configurations to be all built on BuildBot to be sure
that no wrong dependence has been introduced?

The first thing to do would be to agree to a dependence tree we want to rispect.
Then we could define one or more partial OFBiz configuration that
should work according to the approved dependence tree.
Then we could setup BuildBot to automatically build them for us.

Whet do you think about?

Thank you,
-Bruno