[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[emf-dev] Re: [modeling-pmc] Builds: The never ending nightmare
- From: Thomas Hallgren <thomas@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:45:00 +0100
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:18.104.22.168) Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.1
On 01/-10/-28163 08:59 PM, Miles Parker wrote:
The way I recall it, you were using our bleeding edge 3.6M4 and reported
an error which we then fixed in our next milestone. I realize that
trying to be an early milestone adopter while at the same time having to
learn about Buckminster can be somewhat overwhelming :-), but as I'm
sure others can testify, we do our utmost to try and help our community
and it makes me sad to hear that you needed to give up.
Hi Ed et. al.,
I had a "chance" to play around a bit with Buckminister, because I wanted to do some product builds. I thought I had build all figured out until I tried to build an RCP product version, then found that all of the mechanisms for packaging and building are completely different! :( There was no simple path to easily turn a Hudson Athena build into an RCP build that I could discover. Unless one's idea of "easy" involves reading pages of Wiki and then hand-editing XML files for Buckminster. see for example: http://www.ralfebert.de/blog/eclipsercp/rcp_builds/. Their was a bunch of really fiddly steps needed to try to get a local instance of Buckminster up and running, including actually bootstrapping the headless environment from command-line, trying to figure out the inevitable plugin conflicts, etc... I finally gave up and just went with the PDE manual build. And in the end, its still down to a veneer over PDE, so you still really need to (try) to understand all of that.
For the record, there is no longer need for hand editing our XML files
in our latest milestone. We now have the EMF editors in place.
There's always the saying - if it ain't broke, don't fix it - and that
applies here too. I think you should use whatever makes your team and
your consumers comfortable. We would of course love to have you on board
with Buckminster and will do what we can to help if asked.
OK, that sounds a bit bitter and I don't really mean it to be -- its just a too recent memory.. OTOH, I of course do (naturally!) think that model-driven approaches are key to this, and I think Buckminster has a lot of promise, but for my use -- already having an Athena build (finally) running -- thought I really wanted to be able to have a local product build for my own needs -- it felt like adding an additional layer of complexity.
Aside from product creation, now that Athena / PDE can now spit out PFS, that takes care of poor man's development time provisioning. So I guess I'm asking -- non-rhetoriacally -- what the advantage might be for those projects already on Athena?
I must say I do like that idea of having more build support!
And we would love to provide it.