Stefán F. Stefánsson wrote:
> Thanks everybody!
>
> I've managed to build it now. The problem was kindof weird and the
> "solution" (if I can call it a solution) was even weirder... Like one
> of you pointed out I had to do a "build clean". After that everything
> worked. I found this rather weird since I deleted EVERYTHING in my
> Jakarta folder! I even deleted ant and rebuilt it but still this
> problem occurred. After the "build clean" though... everything worked.
>
Yep, that's why the "build clean" target is there.
>
> So I feel very stupid now if that makes anybody feel any better ;o)
>
> But nobody has answered my comment and so I post it again:
>
> I think there is a really big need for cleaning up the way Jakarta
> projects are distributed. There are differences between projects and
> even within projects (like the root directory for tomcat 3.2 suddenly
> changed from "tomcat-3.2" to "tomcat-3.2-bX" I think that happened with
> the beta 7) For example:
>
Release packaging is up to the person designated as release manager, and I was
the stuck-ee on 3.2b7 / 3.2b8 / 3.2 final / 3.2.1 because nobody else stepped up
and volunteered.
Regarding directory names, I have seen *way* too many cases where the generic
product name directory ("jakarta-tomcat" in our case) is used for every
release. This makes it tough to keep multiple versions on your system
simultaneously -- correspondingly, it makes scribbling over your currently
running system much more likely. Therefore, I prefer to include the product
version number in the top level directory name.
For the same reason, I put the source into a different directory
("jakarta-tomcat-3.2-src" versus "jakarta-tomcat-3.2") -- to keep innocent
people from scribbling on themselves.
Yes, I should have fixed the scripts that have hard coded dependencies on the
directory being named "jakarta-tomcat". My only defense is ... I was trying to
pick up the pieces on a release we promised six months ago, so I focused on the
code rather than the scripts :-). Patches are welcome!
As you might have seen in the last couple of days, discussions are starting
about the build scripts for Tomcat 4.0. This discussion could profitably
extended to cover release format as well. I don't know how much effort is worth
spending changing things on 3.2, given that 4.0 is imminent, but that's a
function of what people want to spend their time working on.
>
> 1) Tomcat and servletapi come in a zip file that includes the root
> directory for that project... that is, "jakarta-tomcat-3.2-src" and
> "jakarta-servletapi-3.2-src" were included in the zip file and the files
> are ready to be unzipped into the <JAKARTA-HOME> directory on the user
> machine (well... almost... more on that in point 2.). However, when I
> downloaded Ant 1.2 that project came in a zip file that was structured
> in a different way, specifically, it didnt' include the project root
> directory so I had to make the jakarta-ant directory myself and unzip
> the files into that directory.
>
Something that may not be obvious: each Jakarta subproject is run pretty much
independently, "Jakarta" being the name of a web site that generally brings the
folks working on Java-related server side stuff together. To date, there has
been no significant cross-project packaging discussions that I'm aware of,
although it might make some sense.
Making this happen requires someone who has time to join all the appropriate
developers lists and encourage / cajole all of us to work towards a common
standard, if indeed that is what the communities want.
>
> 2) When I had unzipped all files into the <JAKARTA-HOME> directory I had
> a structure that looked something like this:
>
> <JAKARTA HOME>
> jakarta-ant
> jakarta-servletapi-3.2-src
> jakarta-tomcat-3.2-src
>
> I built ant and servletapi but when I tried building tomcat I found out
> that it was trying to point to the servletapi.jar in a directory that
> was supposed to be called jakarta-servletapi but not
> jakarta-servletapi-3.2-src like my structure was then.
>
> Kind regards,
> Stefan Freyr.
Craig
