Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Orbit Minutes 070724"

Line 11: Line 11:
 
== Discussion ==
 
== Discussion ==
  
===Tests===
+
===Manifest Files===
We have also added a basic test suite which verifies the layout of bundles.
+
Based on the results of the Orbit test suite, there are a bunch of failures because the bundles don't contain a manifest file. Further investigation shows that a manifest is there, but is of the wrong casing. (e.g. Mainfest.mf) When we look at CVS, the manifest looks ok so we need to determine where in the build process the problem occurs.
* some tests are currently fail because their manifest files aren't the right casing
+
 
* people need to change manifest casing
+
* <font color="blue">Action: DJ to enter bug against PDE to validate the casing. (Done - [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=194650 bug 194650]) </font>
+
* <font color="red">Action: DJ to gather bundles which are failing and will send note to mailing list. </font>
+
* We need to see if these are tested on Linux.
+
  
 
===Bundle downloads===
 
===Bundle downloads===

Revision as of 13:59, 17 July 2007

Attendees

  • TBD

Discussion

Manifest Files

Based on the results of the Orbit test suite, there are a bunch of failures because the bundles don't contain a manifest file. Further investigation shows that a manifest is there, but is of the wrong casing. (e.g. Mainfest.mf) When we look at CVS, the manifest looks ok so we need to determine where in the build process the problem occurs.


Bundle downloads

Do we want to try and make the GET URLs generated by Orbit be build-independent? That is, not have the build id in it so consumers don't always have to update their map files if there is a new Orbit build and their bundle didn't change?

  • Action: DJ to write wiki describing problems.

R-builds

Discussions surrounding Orbit R-Builds.

  • when is the next r-build?
  • how do we plan for this?
  • same as regular project?
  • branch releng project to europa_maintenance
  • need to tag the map files for each build
  • do we really need branches?
  • create new map files? had because its based on what people consume
  • how about new features? set1 is for europa, something new for maintenance, etc.
  • thought from Pascal: have the build produce multiple map files, one for each consumer based on the info in the ip log file

Next Meeting

  • TBD