[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ecf-dev] Consuming in target environment
- From: Wim Jongman <wim.jongman@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:15:32 +0100
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=mvuc8Sn1l3jgq8TOveor93DeMac/W/i9oe5S81eIIe9JwuX0VvChf/Gs3TXIun0CQn CKfQA3eVse29dgc1r6jO50q68gStxF0O78LjxEm8WUs8qKZ9SmiRwYcPl1YCPy4EB+8M qz3RYXdj3zW+umaCVzlyjXFReXWHiu6pAWo5A=
> if switched off all properties that change version ranges to be relaxed.
> Please give the new nightly build a spin .
Thanks but unfortunately, this new build is not accepted by p2.
Connection to https://build.ecf-project.org/hudson/job/N-HEAD-sdk.feature/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/site.p2/p2.index
failed on sun.security.validator.ValidatorException: PKIX path
sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to
find valid certification path to requested target. Retry attempt 0
> But even if this fixes your problem, I'd still argue that the target
> editor is broken. Just its inability to handle relaxed version ranges
> (RVR) is simply not an argument that RVS are a no-go per se (cyclic
I agree. It should be relaxed about this. I will flag this on the bug.
> However, from the bug it appears as if the power that be are working on
> putting a simultaneous release policy in place that prevents RVR anyway
> for Indigo. So if we want to be part of Indigo, we would have to revert
mmm. I'm sure they don't do that just to annoy us ;-)
> the build back to how "things have always been done". (Why is ECF
> exactly part of Indigo again? Just extra work and little or no gain
Yes, well, if you are going to bring out a release anyway, why not do
it with the ART?
> do our consumers really benefit?)
That depends. If I have a stable system, I hate new releases. If I
have problems and need patches I love them.
I think the ART is very useful for showing the quality and reliability
of the Eclipse ecosystem. It is a great marketing tool (more then
anything else IMHO) and I would like ECF to stay a part of it just to
show our quality. It is a great achievement to deliver. However, I
realize that it puts strain on you and Scott in particular. So I would
say that it is your call.