Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> > I am building many projects and I did try gump, but rapidly became
> > irritated with having to hand edit the workspace file everytime you
> > made updates. I sent a rudimentary patch so that I could try to build
> > the TDK with gump but they weren't integrated. You started making
> > the profile some what more portable when the same patches were
> > integrated into AntGump.
>
> You sent a patch on Feb 18th which moved some of the definition into
> properties files. As you have noted, I was heading in a different
> direction: factoring the common information into profiles and repositories,
> and having the per-workspace information in the workspace.xml.
>
> > I also find the xsl almost impossible to look at, I simply
> > don't like all the logic in the xsl. Some like it, which is fine but
> > I can't look at it and therefore trying to modify Gump or trying to
> > fix it became difficult for me.
> >
> > What I am most interested in now is a set of DTDs for the profile,
> > projects, and repositories. I eventually figured out what tags were available
> > and am using a Java based tool that I call maven that uses Velocity
> > to generate ant files. Basically a profile is mapped into a Java object
> > and then I use a dependency engine that geir whipped up for me to
> > figure everything out.
>
> FWIW, I have always considered the current implementation itself as merely
> a means to an end. It is the DTDs for the profiles, projects,
> repositories, and workspaces that I am interested in.
>
> > What I really want is to be able to have someone download a profile
> > for the TDK and easily build it so that many turbiner's can start
> > testing standard apps. Maybe gump is better at this now, but earlier
> > using the xml workspace
> > was very cumbersome because it was tied to your setup for checking
> > backward compatibility which is what I saw Gump as. After submitting
> > my first set of patches and getting no comment and not having them
> > integrated I wasn't really all that interested in playing with
> > gump anymore. Then I tried ant gump, but the xsl just throws me for a
> > loop.
>
> OK, so you sent a patch, it wasn't integrated and gave up, eh? ;-)
>
> Can we start over?
Sure, I'm all for it.
> Can you describe, either with concrete XML or with a DTD, what you think
> you need to support a TDK build? Then perhaps we can see if we can work
> together to either improve the current gump implementation to support these
> needs or...
Yup, I can pop my altered xml files into the alexandria repository
to start the discussion or maybe just a small example.
> > I much prefer dealing with a profile as an object. I have a sub-optimal
> > xml->java object mapper but eventually if we get some standard DTDs I
> > can use something like castor or another mapping tool that can use a DTD.
>
> ...or replace the current Gump implementation. My preference for xml->java
> mappers is for something like what is found in Ant and is totally
> reflection based - no DTDs or code generation required.
That would be fine with me, we could probably use the Digester package
in the commons.
> > The other thing I had slated for maven was the ability for each project
> > to take care of it's own project definition. I'm sure you have the same
> > plan.
>
> I'd love to see projects maintain their own definition. My guess is that
> it will take a while as for now we can't even get projects to agree on what
> to name their build.xml, where to place it, what standard targets would
> be...
>
> We also will need continue to need to be able to have project definitions
> for projects which outside of our control.
>
> > I also wanted to make a turbine app out of it to try and make it
> > simple to maintain the configuration.
>
> A turbine app wrapper would be great, but I would like some sort of
> bootstrappable command line which only depends on things readily available.
I agree. I like the command line/ant tool for building. I was thinking
about a turbine app to maintain the xml config info.
> > I really would like to work together, so maybe the first thing we can do
> > is get the DTDs going. I really can't deal with XSL, it drives me mad,
> > and I don't believe it's very maintainable so I don't think I'll be
> > playing with gump anymore but we can probably find some common ground.
>
> Cool! Can you work on either a concrete XML file, a DTD, or a roughed out
> implementation of a Gump replacement in Java?
Definitely. I will make some time and push the little java impl into
the alexandria proposals directory and we can go from there. I will
look at the Digester, do you have any suggestion for tools to look
at vis-a-vis XML->Java mapping?
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
http://tambora.zenplex.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
