-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Karsten Wade wrote: > ----- "Jonathan Steffan" <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> It's still in the works. I've had some setbacks moving from Plone >> 2.5.3 >> to Plone 3 (as a Plone developer). I'll try my best to put together >> something for beta testing but I'd really like to look at some other >> unrelated changes Ive been playing with (mainly getting rid of the >> Makefiles). I'll try to put together an email with a score of >> suggestions to test the waters for where we could go with this. Right >> now the buildd (the daemon that interacts between plone and cvs) uses >> the existing Makefiles but requires them to be error free and also >> requires the innermost Makefile to be valid for building the >> document. >> It's very fragile to say the least. I'm working out a pure python >> based >> build system that will replace the Makefiles with simple/nice config >> files for each module, among other things. I'll try to send this email >> soon. > > Recommend that you send that email *before* you do any coding. I'm not sure what is fragile to Plone about the Makefiles, > but it sounds like you are suggesting to duplicate their actions entirely within Plone. Actually, the changes I would like to make will not have anything to do with plone. Plone will just be able to trigger actions, in the same way a human would. Thereby making a duplicate, parallel system to understand and maintain. Well, this is already the case. There is static logic to find the innermost Makefile for the buildd (read: plone action) to actually work with > Unless you plan on personally porting changes from the Makefile into this new system $FOREVER ... it doesn't seem like a plan that can scale. No, I'd like to see a pure python based solution replace the Makefiles. > We already are resource challenged taking care of just one toolchain. Yes. I know. My thoughts on getting rid of the Makefiles has been from observing comments about how much of a PITA they are to work with. > If the Makefiles in CVS have errors or are invalid, that is a larger problem than just Plone. > Wouldn't the better solution be to fix the central Makefiles? I was proposing replacing the Makefiles. Jonathan Steffan daMaestro -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHAoZtrRJs5w2Gr1kRAjg7AJ0eA8550YVM6q/i4jxYLk6JyI7gGQCg4B2e h4UoFnRJqbqERQGONPe2/xM= =scFa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
