Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: FW: [eclipselink-dev] Why need to change build pathofeclipselink.sdo.testfrom [javax.activation] to[javax.activation 1.1.0] ?

No there isn't one in the build. It is a good idea though. As Tom has mentioned this is a new requirement for us, and we're still working out some of the requirements so automating the download of the dependencies isn't something we've considered yet.

I have set up something similar for the automated builds, so it should be more a matter of modifying existing routines than writing and testing completely new functionality, but as I mentioned we will need to work out some standards WRT were the files should reside by default, etc.

File a [Build] bug in bugzilla so the idea isn't lost. Once the 1.1.1 release and Galileo linkage has cooled down, I'll have a few cycles to look at build improvements.

-Eric

Sebastien Tardif wrote:
Do we have an Ant or Maven task to get most of the Orbit bundles needed?
Should we?

-----Original Message-----
From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sebastien
Tardif
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:10 PM
To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
Subject: RE: [eclipselink-dev] Why need to change build
pathofeclipselink.sdo.testfrom [javax.activation] to[javax.activation
1.1.0] ?

I get it. I was confused by seeing a project in the workspace named
[javax.activation] but eclipselink.sdo.test depending instead on
[javax.activation 1.1.0].

The answer seems to be this sentence from
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Building:

->>Note: The above libraries will eventually be removed from our SVN
repository and only available from Orbit<<-


-----Original Message-----
From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Ware
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 10:36 AM
To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] Why need to change build path
ofeclipselink.sdo.testfrom [javax.activation] to [javax.activation
1.1.0] ?

Hi Sebastien,

   Are you getting javax.activation from our SVN repository or from
Orbit?

   We are in the middle of a transition to use Orbit to get all the
dependencies we share with other Eclipse projects. There is some info here:

http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Building

   The projects are set up to work with the projects from Orbit.

   We have seen some issues where Eclipse itself does not pick up name
changes like the one above in some versions on refresh.

-Tom

Sebastien Tardif wrote:
I'm learning slowly how to compile and run tests of EclipseLink.

I have recent code and by default, project eclipselink.sdo.test is
complaining that the build path is not right, not finding
[javax.activation], so I had to change the "Projects" in "Java Build
Path" from [javax.activation] to [javax.activation 1.1.0] to get it to
work.
Is it really the step needed? That doesn't sound right.
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev



Back to the top