Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Flume >> mail # dev >> Re: issues compiling trunk on a new clone


Copy link to this message
-
Re: issues compiling trunk on a new clone
Mike, I'm obviously aware of the RTC policy. However, my impression of Hari's request was that It was a request to get the build working ASAP. If I was going to have to create a Jira and have it reviewed I wouldn't have bothered since I didn't know all the details of how it is being used. That is also why I referred to it as a temporary commit below,

Ralph

On Jul 1, 2012, at 11:16 PM, Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Ralph,
> Thanks for finding the issue! It seems that the "aggregate" goal is still
> suffering from bug MJAVADOC-116 <
> https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MJAVADOC-116> whereas the aggregate-jar
> functionality does not have the same problem. However, making that change
> broke the docs and required an addition to dist.xml so as the 1.2.0 release
> manager I've committed that change to trunk on top of your commit as well
> as onto the 1.2.0 branch.
>
> Side note, and no offense intended, I did not see a +1 for that commit? Per
> Flume's RTC policy we must get a +1 on-list whenever we check into the
> Flume codebase, except for special situations such as RMing.
>
> Per your earlier question, the purpose of aggregating the javadocs is to
> include the apidocs directory in the binary distribution, so that the
> convenience artifact ships with up-to-date javadocs in a browsable format
> inside the docs directory. The RST docs link to them from the index page.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Mike
>
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> Ok - I've made the change. However, I believe Mike already cut a release
>> branch so he will have to do something there as well.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Jun 30, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, changing the goal to aggregate-jar fixed the issue for me. But it
>> obviously generates a javadoc jar where the aggregate goal does not.  I'm
>> not sure what the original intent here was/is so I can't say if that is the
>> correct fix or if the javadoc plugin was really meant to be part of the
>> site plugin.
>>>
>>> I'll be happy to make a temporary commit to get it working.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Jun 30, 2012, at 5:19 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ralph,
>>>>
>>>> Will changing the goal to aggregate-jar fix the issue? I currently do
>> not
>>>> have access to the code or the machine on which I work, so I have not
>> been
>>>> able to try it out. If that works, lets do that, else disable the plugin
>>>> till we can resolve this issue?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Hari
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Ralph Goers <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Change the javadoc goal from aggregate to aggregate-jar.  aggregate
>> would
>>>>> normally be used in the reporting section when creating the web site.
>> I am
>>>>> assuming that a javadoc jar is what is desired. Otherwise I'm not sure
>> what
>>>>> the intent of the aggregate goal is there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Mike Percy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just did a pom.xml search-and-replace to change the version after
>>>>>> branching for 1.2.0 and I ran into this error when attempting to
>> build,
>>>>> so
>>>>>> I didn't check in the pom version changes. I will have to look at this
>>>>> over
>>>>>> the weekend. If anyone has enough Maven expertise to suggest a fix
>> then
>>>>>> additional hints are welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Ralph Goers <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been seeing errors from the javadoc plugin but it hasn't failed
>> my
>>>>>>> build.  I haven't started from scratch in a while though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 29, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Seems like this is causing upstream build failure too. Anyone knows
>> how
>>>>>>> to fix this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: