Ok, just checking the output of the build. I have a "dist" folder with:
pst.jar wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar The old guide ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Building+Wave+in+a+Box#) makes reference to waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar waveinabox-server-0.3.jar in a "wave-protocol" directory. Neither the directory or those files exist. I assume "waveinabox-server-0.3.jar" is now called "wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar" But is "waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar" now "wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar" ? ~~~ Thomas & Bertines online review show: http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) On 4 December 2013 21:50, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Might be worth at some point looking into alternatives for multi-language > support? > Should be possible without multiplying compile times. > I'll have to look into it once I am up and running. > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 4 December 2013 21:33, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Permutation is not only per browser, it is also per language and I think >> WIAB supports 4 languages. >> Anyway, it is very strange it took 4 hours, probably 2 GB is too little, >> you ll need about 4 GB. >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > 32??? There isnt 32 different browser engines is there :? >> > My own GWT projects, (using 2.5.1) use 7 at most. (and even that should >> go >> > down in newer versions as Opera phase's out Presto.) >> > >> > It wasn't GWT permutations taking the bulk of the time anyway, mind >> you - >> > it seemed to mostly be the testing and (strangely) expanding JAR files. >> > That was just my perception though. Certainly before it got to >> > "compile-gwt:" took at least 4 hours. >> > Would the log help here? >> > >> > My machine is a 4200 dual core Amd. Not much ram (2GB), was running >> chrome >> > at the same time, but not doing anything intensive. I wouldn't be >> surprised >> > if my machine is to blame here, but I cant think why it would be this >> > different. >> > --- >> > Anyway, dinner now, then back to poking at things. >> > >> > >> > ~~~ >> > Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> > >> > >> > On 4 December 2013 20:59, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > We have 32 GWT permutations the moment, we used to have only 4... Some >> > last >> > > changes caused this increase... We need to be more cautious about >> > updating >> > > GWT client code. >> > > I tried >> > > ant clean dist-server compile-gwt test >> > > It took me about 16 minutes. If you tried the default target which >> also >> > > includes running tests then it could take about 6 minutes more. >> > > So max 21 minutes on 2-core laptop. This is for the full prod build, >> if >> > you >> > > run the server from compiled source with dev GWT setting(only 2 >> > > permutations) then it takes only a few minutes, or even less. >> > > >> > > Basically running wave is simple like: >> > > >> > > git clone git://git.apache.org/wave.git wave >> > > cd wave >> > > cp server.config.example server.config >> > > ant dist-server compile-gwt run-server >> > > Open the browser at http://localhost:9898 >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >> > > >> > > > > "BUILD SUCCESSFUL >> > > > > Total time: 312 minutes 41 seconds" >> > > > >> > > > Err.. it takes ~5 minutes on my dev machine! Is this a single core >> vm, >> > > > doing lots of swapping, and with shared io? >> > > > >> > > > > Suggestion; >> > > > > Would it be possible to have a virtual machine with everything >> set up >> > > > > already? or is there technical/license reasons for that to be >> > > unsuitable? >> > > > >> > > > I suspect this would be difficult. (And you don't really want to be >> in >> > a >> > > > VM). >> > > > >> > > > > Query: >> > > > > Can Wave be updated to JDK7? is there big issues holding it back >> ? Or >> > > is >> > > > > there more open alternatives we can use instead - one that doesn't >> > > > require >> > > > > handing over personal details to a company? >> > > > >> > > > (OpenJDK 1.6 works fine, so...) >> > > > >> > > > This is quite difficult to do for the codebase. You would also need >> to >> > > > upgrade all the third-party components. >> > > > >> > > > Please continue to provide feedback. >> > > > >> > > > Thanks. >> > > > Ali >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >
