Hi Ian
Are there any more issues that hold you from voting on the Apache Wave
release on general@apache?
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 3:25 AM Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> I am not sure about the best way to import this into eclipse, I have
> always used the CLI tools directly. I have CC'd the dev-list in case
> they have a better answer for you.
>
> The inability to find ${build.classpath.path}, ${build.macros.path}
> suggests that you are missing/failed-to-import/failed-to-reference the
> build.properties file which contains the values for these macros.
>
> The follow-up problem about missing define-gxpc is to be expected
> because of the above problem resulting in it not importing
> build-macros.xml, which defines "define-gxpc" amongst other things.
>
> Ali
>
> On 6 November 2015 at 14:51, Ian Dunlop <ian.dun...@manchester.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'll give it at 0 the moment since I encountered a build issue. I
> > downloaded the src zip and imported the code into Eclipse Mars (4.50)
> > with jdk 1.7.0_79 & ANT 1.9.4 but found the following issues:
> >
> > 1)
> > BUILD FAILED
> > C:\Users\idunlop\workspace\waveinabox\build.xml:28: Cannot find
> > C:\Users\idunlop\workspace\waveinabox\${build.classpath.path} imported
> > from C:\Users\idunlop\workspace\waveinabox\build.xml
> >
> > Resolved by commenting out
> >
> > <import file="${build.classpath.path}"/>
> >
> > <!-- Import macros -->
> > <import file="${build.macros.path}"/>
> >
> > and tried again
> >
> > 2)
> >
> > BUILD FAILED
> > Target "define-gxpc" does not exist in the project "waveinabox". It is
> > used from target "gen-gxp".
> >
> > Resolved by removing define-gxpc from
> >
> > <target name="gen-gxp" description="Generates GXP files"
> > depends="init, define-gxpc, gen-gxp-dep" unless="skip.gen-gxp">
> > <gxpc srcdir="${src.dir}" srcpaths="${src.dir}"
> > destdir="${gen.dir}/gxp"
> > target="org.waveprotocol.box.server.gxp" />
> > <touch file="${dep}/gen-gxp"/>
> > </target>
> >
> > 3)
> >
> > BUILD FAILED
> > C:\Users\idunlop\workspace\waveinabox\build.xml:120: Problem: failed
> > to create task or type buildproto
> > Cause: The name is undefined.
> > Action: Check the spelling.
> > Action: Check that any custom tasks/types have been declared.
> > Action: Check that any <presetdef>/<macrodef> declarations have taken
> > place.
> >
> > At that point I figured it best to report the issues here:
> >
> > Is there a procedure for building in eclipse, am I missing an ant
> > setting somewhere?
> >
> > So, apart fromn the compile issue everything else looks good:
> >
> > signatures are good
> > artifact/hashes good
> > DISCLAIMER OK
> > LICENCE OK
> > NOTICE OK
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> >
> > On 04/11/2015 07:14, Justin Mclean wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> +1 binding.
> >>
> >> Could you please fix the LICENCE Appendix in the next release. The
> >> text should be "Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]” not
> >> "Copyright 2013 The Apache Software Foundation”.
> >>
> >> I checked: - artefact has incubating in name - signatures and
> >> hashes good - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE has minor issue with the
> >> copyright in the appendix. Not required but it could also use the
> >> sort form in LICENSE [1] particularly as you bundle the software
> >> LICENSE files. - NOTICE good. - All source files have Apache
> >> headers - No unexpected binary file in source release (but see
> >> below) - can compile from source - test pass
> >>
> >> I notice there’s a couple of photographs in the source release, I
> >> assume you have permission from the person who took them to use
> >> these? IF so you may want to put that in the LICENSE.
> >>
> >> There's a number of binary file without extensions in
> >> /thumbnail_patterns/ but they all look to be PNGs is this the case?
> >> Where did these images come from?
> >>
> >> I had a quick look at the binary release and the LICENCE and NOTICE
> >> appear comprehensive. I didn;t do a though check. I did notice that
> >> the year is incorrect in the NOTICE file and LICENSE appendix has
> >> the same issue. It’s actually wrong here as non ASF Apache
> >> licensed software is mentioned. There no need to mean Apache
> >> licensed software in the LICENCE but no harm is done by donning so.
> >> [2]
> >>
> >> Thanks, Justin
> >>
> >> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
> >> 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > - --
> > Ian Dunlop, eScience Lab
> > School of Computer Science
> > The University of Manchester
> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7066-3350
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v2
> >
> > iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWPL6FAAoJEPK45GBX+Cy5agYH/3yPH2vLCltvOqIZlv70TJ9R
> > EmdbRL6rvpJjcah+GH9BPpsYEeENXw5WTARH42RVZT4gFUz62GBIkZhhqFks0/qx
> > ubL+bekcivMI2P/eZ3T6S/mKw52d8esRaDvrMKaUZ3Ax3tdkYt/dPaYoXGxAMNS4
> > 5IolSgvMaTT2qKlcx0fmCh+gdfmxHFo0ZTvZ55V9ucnmsvQY8orGqZt7SJ+jdySz
> > vp9AIvnxStMCorZ8tKSLDVo1H+ciQOXxCZWymFlAlm7nQAw5KoLQYMp/OBUrw6Lk
> > urdolruKU7YGgdwh5uV8WHi+cCfpIyQIRaIz8nFlXYTFx/VL8Dm7vrgFpcH1jyw=
> > =d5Aa
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
