[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ecf-dev] ECF build v2 -- Build easier
- From: Markus Alexander Kuppe <ecf-dev_eclipse.org@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:17:00 +0200
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Mailscanner-null-check: 1249204622.16009@3VQsCCNnxDbrvbRJPRnU+Q
- User-agent: Thunderbird 184.108.40.206 (X11/20090608)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Scott Lewis wrote:
> In broad strokes, we need to:
> 1) Add bundle signing (for dev.eclipse.org build)
To follow up on the discussion we had during the conf call with regards
to signing, we might wanna consider moving our build infrastructure over
to the common builder (Hudson server running at build.eclipse.org) .
One thing I'm not sure of though, is if we would be allowed to build OSU
code at build.eclipse.org.
> 2) Setup/refactor the features so that we can build
> a) weekly platform integration builds (i.e. filetransfer and ECF core)
> b) auto, daily, integration and release builds (on-demand for
> release...others can be automated)
IMO it makes sense to move all bundles included by platform into their
own feature. This bundle gets build e.g. on Monday each week for
integration with platform. The remainder of ECF would then be structured
into a single bundle or bundles organized by functionality (discovery,
remote services, cola, ...). The build would be done on a weekday after
Monday and be based on the Monday's build artifacts.
We should still run nightly/ci builds though for the whole code base to
validate check-ins/run smoke tests. The emphasis here is on quick
feedback for the committer.
> 3) Add a builder for the features/bundles at OSU OSL (including
> JMS/ActiveMQ, Yahoo provider, TweetHub (product), and perhaps other
> things...e.g. SOC student work)
How do the requirements look like for TweetHub? Do you want/need RCP's
for each platform?
4) Is Buckminster going to be replaced by p2?
During the con call the question came up if Buckminster's functionality
of resolving/materializing build dependencies is going to be replaced by
p2 in which case we might not wanna invest on Buckminster. I will ask
the Buckminster team to respond to this question.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----