Hi Doug,
> Sanjiva - if I read your note right you say that the
> source dist isn't buildable, right? why?
> I've never understood that - it seems like
> if I wanted to grab the source I'm gonna
> want to build it - making someone go to cvs
> when there's a file calling itself "the source"
> is basically a lie. Please change it to just
> zip-up the cvs tree w/o the CVS dirs.
The source distribution is buildable. I followed the model I saw Jakarta and
the Sun JDKs themselves (and umpteen other projects) using. That is, extract
the binary, you get the distribution; extract the source, and you've added
the source directory. Our nightly builds are like Jakarta's nightly builds;
that is, snapshot of the whole CVS tree.
Thanks,
-Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 5:46 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Release v2.2
>
>
> Just a couple of quick comments:
> Glen - remove that sample dir and re-extract it from
> cvs. As Sanjiva said that _will_ fix it (I had
> the same problem myself a while ago - a bug in
> cvs if you ask me).
> Sanjiva - if I read your note right you say that the
> source dist isn't buildable, right? why?
> I've never understood that - it seems like
> if I wanted to grab the source I'm gonna
> want to build it - making someone go to cvs
> when there's a file calling itself "the source"
> is basically a lie. Please change it to just
> zip-up the cvs tree w/o the CVS dirs.
> -Dug
>
>
> "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 05/30/2001 04:18:37 AM
>
> Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc:
> Subject: Re: Release v2.2
>
>
>
> Glen Daniels writes:
> > -1 as is. I'm really sorry to do this at the 11th (12th? :))
> hour, but I
> > finally actually tried out the dist for real.
>
> I'm rather disappointed that you didn't check out the release
> candidates and waited until a vote was called to bring this
> up. Nevertheless, problems are problems ..
>
>
> > I just did an "ant dist" and got two errors building the samples. Looks
> > like both com/client/addit.java and com/client/sum.java are the wrong
> case
> > (files should perhaps be Addit.java and Sum.java to match the class
> names -
> > problem went away for me when I renamed them)... is anyone else seeing
> this?
>
> I just downloaded RC3 and don't see this problem. The case was changed
> sometime ago .. could it be that your CVS repository is out of sync?
>
> Also, are you doing ant dist on the 2.2RC3 tree? If so that's not
> what's intended for the release .. we're not expecting people to build
> distributions from our distribution! However, just to see what it does,
> I did "ant dist" on the RC3 tree and it worked fine.
>
> > I also wanted to really quickly update the JRun installation
> docs to take
> > advantage of the soap.war file, which I did, but while doing so noticed
> that
> > the war file doesn't contain WEB-INF/lib/soap.jar!!
> >
> > This last bit is really broken. It means there's basically no point to
> the
> > war file at all - i.e. you can't just drop it into your servlet engine
> and
> > expect things to work without futzing with your classpath.
>
> The classes are in the WEB-INF/classes directory, which is a completely
> acceptable alternate to putting the jar file. So what's the problem?
>
> > I'm checking in a new build.xml, which you are welcome to do with as you
> > will, but I think the last one is a show-stopper. I'm not sure what to
> do
> > about the first one - who owns these files? Is it just my environment?
>
> It is certainly an acceptable approach to put the jar file in the lib
> dir of the WEB-INF directory. However, the approach in the current
> build is also correct and works. I don't see any need to do a new
> candidate just because there's a different way to do something.
>
> > These changes aren't much, but I don't feel comfortable doing
> the release
> > unless we can build the samples and generate a soap.war that works (I
> > confirmed that it does in fact work with the new build.xml).
>
> Can you please check your environment and see whether there are any
> real problems? So far I haven't been able to verify any of the problems
> you found ..
>
> If there aren't any problems I urge you to lift your -1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sanjiva.
>
>
>
