On 8/24/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Continuum works differently from the old bash script in a couple of > ways. First, it only executes builds when svn changes have happened. > So if there are no changes, there will be no "nightly build" for a > component. It also looks for changes and executes builds hourly, so > there can be multiple builds in a given day.
Given that, isn't Gump producing something closer to what we want for nightly builds than Continuum? Why not use the Gump output for the nightlies? -- Martin Cooper We need to decide what we jars we publish to the snapshot repo on > people.apache.org and what zips/tarballs we make available on the > "nightlies" page. Seems to me we have two choices. > > 1. Publish only the latest successful build (with build number and > date in the metadata but only commons-foo-x.y.z-SNAPSHOT.jar as the > jar name) and do the same with the zips/tarballs (only one is > available at a given time) > 2. Publish jars with uniqueVersion=true, so they are each named > differently and keep a fixed number of them around, say 5. Similarly > for the zips/tarballs. > > I think 1 is simpler and will be easier to maintain (no cron cleanups > necessary), but we could get 2. to work if others feel strongly that > we should be maintaining a stack of successful builds. Thoughts? > > To get the zips/tarballs to work, components need to get m2 assemblies > defined for all of the components. > > Phil > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
