qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Ritchie" <ritch...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Continuous Build Server. Was: NEED HELP: getting the trunk back in order
Date Thu, 08 Mar 2007 15:02:45 GMT
Does apache have windows build machines. We really need to build on
windows (.net) and RHEL 3 & 4 for c++ as well as java. Then interop
test the result. The guys from AntHillPro have said we can have a
licence we just need to sort out how/where we use it.

On 08/03/07, Daniel Kulp <daniel.kulp@iona.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 08 March 2007 09:13, Marnie McCormack wrote:
> > This is interesting - I wasn't aware that Apache had hardware for
> > supporting project specific continuous build environments (and I guess
> > people to support it ) ?
>
> There is a continuum vm setup that several java projects are using:
>
> http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/servlet/continuum
>
> Unfortunately, it's not exactly a fast machine.  Also, your java builds are
> not continuum compatible.
>
>
> TLP's can also ask for a zone to be created on zones.   However, I'm not
> sure if a podling can or not.   The "rules" say your PMC chair is the
> administrator for the zone, but the podlings official PMC chair is the
> incubator PMC chair.   Thus, I'm not sure if podlings are allowed or not.
> If you're interested, you could ask and see what they say.
>
> Dan
>
>
> >
> > On 3/8/07, Daniel Kulp <daniel.kulp@iona.com> wrote:
> > > I just want to bring this up....
> > >
> > > Make sure you send a note to infrastructure@a.o as well as legal@ and
> > > possibly the incubator PMC's before making any final desision.  There
> > > are several "free for use with open source projects" that we really
> > > shouldn't be using do to reverse-marketing stipulations that are
> > > unacceptable to apache, especially for incubator projects.
> > >
> > > Also, you should work with infra to get it hosted on apache hardware
> > > if at all possible.  It would look much better from a project
> > > standpoint to be working with apache.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > On Thursday 08 March 2007 03:55, Rupert Smith wrote:
> > > > Still, I think we should accept the AntHill licence because it is
> > > > without doubt a superior product. I need to chase them up about it,
> > > > but was hoping to some back to them with an enthusiastic response
> > > > from the qpid developers first. Accepting the licence doesn't commit
> > > > us to it forever, we can try it out and see if we are happy first.
> > > > In fact, download a free trial and try it out for yourself.
> > > >
> > > > CruiseControl is ok for building relatively simple Java projects. I
> > > > find it quite buggy, recently I moved my personal library onto svn
> > > > from cvs. CC would no longer invoke maven multiple times, only the
> > > > first maven call would ever execute... You get what you pay for I
> > > > suppose.
> > > >
> > > > Anthill offers two very usefull things, wrt to qpid, that cruise
> > > > control does not. A server/agent architecture, and the 'Build Life'
> > > > concept.
> > > >
> > > > The server/agent architecture, allows you to set up build agents on
> > > > many machines (each one a bit like an instance of Cruise Control).
> > > > The server farms the build jobs out to the agents. This is ideal for
> > > > coordinating a build accross Unix and Windows boxes.
> > > >
> > > > The build life concept puts all stages of a multi-agent or
> > > > multi-step build under a common version stamp that spans the life of
> > > > the entire process. This means that the build server is clever
> > > > enough to know that the parts it built and tested on different boxes
> > > > all belong to the same build life. So you can build accross multiple
> > > > os, test accross multiple os, perhaps tck validate, and have a
> > > > consistent build stamp over all of this. If a build makes it through
> > > > the entire process, all build artifacts can be promoted, in step
> > > > with each other.
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/07, Alan Conway <aconway@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > Nuno Santos wrote:
> > > > > > Will also need to check regarding the licensing issue... our
> > > > > > plan was to use CruiseControl but I see in the chart that you
> > > > > > mentioned -- very useful, btw -- that it doesn't directly
> > > > > > support "make", so we have to see if we can somehow integrate
> > > > > > the C++ build with CruiseControl, or opt for a different
> > > > > > continuous build tool.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've participated in large scale multi-project mixed C++/Java
> > > > > builds in cruisecontrol before, it'll do the job with a bit of
> > > > > custom scripting. It's easy to do make, just write an ant script
> > > > > that calls make. There are (were) xslt scripts shipped with
> > > > > cruisecontrol that turn the stdout and stderr from make into a
> > > > > nice HTML log with the stderr bits highlighted in red. You can
> > > > > also get CppUnit results nicely formatted as HTML by hacking the
> > > > > cruisecontrol xslt for JUnit logs.
> > > > >
> > > > > The other tools may still be worth investigating, I've no
> > > > > experience with them.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Alan.
> > >
> > > --
> > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > Principal Engineer
> > > IONA
> > > P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
> > > daniel.kulp@iona.com
> > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>


-- 
Martin Ritchie

Mime
View raw message