OSGeo.org › OSGeo Software and Data Projects › MapGuide Open Source › MapGuide Internals

fdo installation & build script confusion

11 messages

UV-2

fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

In order to test my sandbox branched from trunk I needed to compile FDO
from trunk as there are no build server is creating HEAD builds for this
yet.

this cannot work out of the box because of path issues.

the mapguide buildscript checks for

MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%

whereas the FDO build.bat installs into

MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin
MgDev\Oem\FDO\Inc
MgDev\Oem\FDO\Lib

I included a patch for mapguide MgDev\build.bat to make this work more
intuitively as those build scripts still are a lot easier to use than
many separate VS solutions

now you can build FDO & mapguide
using:
>cd %PATH_TO_FDO%
>build -a=buildinstall -o=%PATH_TO_MGDEV%\Oem
>cd %PATH_TO_MGDEV%
>build

I know this is between to separate OsGeo projects but not being
responsible does not make it go away.

Index: build.bat
===================================================================
--- build.bat (revision 4260)
+++ build.bat (working copy)
@@ -204,15 +204,19 @@
goto custom_error_no_help
:check_fdo
:check_fdo_bin
-if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%" goto check_fdo_inc
+
+REM if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin" goto check_fdo_inc
+if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin" goto check_fdo_inc
SET ERRORMSG=Unable to find FDO binaries. Copy the FDO binaries %MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%
goto custom_error_no_help
+
:check_fdo_inc
-if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%" goto check_fdo_lib
+if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Inc" goto check_fdo_lib
SET ERRORMSG=Unable to find FDO headers. Copy the FDO headers into %MG_OEM%\Inc
goto custom_error_no_help
+
:check_fdo_lib
-if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%" goto start_build
+if exist "%MG_OEM%\FDO\Lib" goto start_build
SET ERRORMSG=Unable to find FDO lib files. Copy the FDO lib files into %MG_OEM%\Lib
goto custom_error_no_help

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Tom Fukushima

RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

Let's see if I understand this...Does this work if I need to do both a 32-bit and 64-bit build using the a single version of the source? This is what the build machine will need to do. If the answer is no then I think that the change should be made in the FDO build scripts to put the binaries into the correct bin subfolder {bin\release, bin\release64, bin\debug, bin\debug64}.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:17 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List; FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

In order to test my sandbox branched from trunk I needed to compile FDO
from trunk as there are no build server is creating HEAD builds for this
yet.

this cannot work out of the box because of path issues.

the mapguide buildscript checks for

MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%

whereas the FDO build.bat installs into

MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin
MgDev\Oem\FDO\Inc
MgDev\Oem\FDO\Lib

I included a patch for mapguide MgDev\build.bat to make this work more
intuitively as those build scripts still are a lot easier to use than
many separate VS solutions

now you can build FDO & mapguide
using:
>cd %PATH_TO_FDO%
>build -a=buildinstall -o=%PATH_TO_MGDEV%\Oem
>cd %PATH_TO_MGDEV%
>build

I know this is between to separate OsGeo projects but not being
responsible does not make it go away.
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Dave Wilson

Grants?

Reply Threaded

Could either of the groups benefit from the following:

http://www.gisuser.com/content/view/18597/2/

Basically grants are available that maybe OSGeo, MapGuide or FDO might qualify for.

Dave

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

UV-2

Re: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Tom Fukushima

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

> Let's see if I understand this...Does this work if I need to do both a 32-bit and 64-bit build using the a single version of the source? This is what the build machine will need to do. If the answer is no then I think that the change should be made in the FDO build scripts to put the binaries into the correct bin subfolder {bin\release, bin\release64, bin\debug, bin\debug64}.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:17 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List; FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion
>
> In order to test my sandbox branched from trunk I needed to compile FDO
> from trunk as there are no build server is creating HEAD builds for this
> yet.
>
> this cannot work out of the box because of path issues.
>
> the mapguide buildscript checks for
>
> MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin\%TYPEBUILD%
>
> whereas the FDO build.bat installs into
>
> MgDev\Oem\FDO\Bin
> MgDev\Oem\FDO\Inc
> MgDev\Oem\FDO\Lib
>
> I included a patch for mapguide MgDev\build.bat to make this work more
> intuitively as those build scripts still are a lot easier to use than
> many separate VS solutions
>
> now you can build FDO & mapguide
> using:
> >cd %PATH_TO_FDO%
> >build -a=buildinstall -o=%PATH_TO_MGDEV%\Oem
> >cd %PATH_TO_MGDEV%
> >build
>
> I know this is between to separate OsGeo projects but not being
> responsible does not make it go away.
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Tom Fukushima

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Tom Fukushima

RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

Re: public history of the review... In case anyone is interpreting me as saying all communication must be done via the ticket; that is not my intent. You could have an IM session (or other type of communication) and then paste the session contents (or summary of the communication) into the ticket.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Trevor Wekel

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Tom Fukushima

Hi everyone,

I can start looking into code review infrastructure once we've got the builds sorted out. The build infrastructure will be moving to a colocation site in a couple of weeks. This will provide sufficient bandwidth and availability to host a code review tool.

Autodesk uses Smart Bear's Code Collaborator http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php. According to their website, the tool is free for Open Source projects. I can set it up in a few weeks so we can try it out. If we don't like it, we can just turf it.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Tom Fukushima

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

I saw that you gave a pretty steep price tag to keep a system like this running (was it $500/month?). I don't think that something like this would be in the project's best interest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:28 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Hi everyone,

I can start looking into code review infrastructure once we've got the builds sorted out. The build infrastructure will be moving to a colocation site in a couple of weeks. This will provide sufficient bandwidth and availability to host a code review tool.

Autodesk uses Smart Bear's Code Collaborator http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php. According to their website, the tool is free for Open Source projects. I can set it up in a few weeks so we can try it out. If we don't like it, we can just turf it.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Trevor Wekel

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

Tom,

So official build infrastructure and a transparent way to perform code reviews on community submissions is not in the project's best interest?

Yes. Hosting, licensing, etc. fees will cost me $500/month or more when I move to colocation. At this point in time, I have not asked the project to fund any of this. Obviously, I would be pleased if they did. But it is up to the PSC to decide what happens with sponsorship funding if/when we receive it.

And frankly, I think $500/month to host 4 machines on a private firewalled VLAN using redundant hardware with automated backup is very competitive.

Sincerely,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 11:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

I saw that you gave a pretty steep price tag to keep a system like this running (was it $500/month?). I don't think that something like this would be in the project's best interest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:28 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Hi everyone,

I can start looking into code review infrastructure once we've got the builds sorted out. The build infrastructure will be moving to a colocation site in a couple of weeks. This will provide sufficient bandwidth and availability to host a code review tool.

Autodesk uses Smart Bear's Code Collaborator http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php. According to their website, the tool is free for Open Source projects. I can set it up in a few weeks so we can try it out. If we don't like it, we can just turf it.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Tom Fukushima

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

I must have misread the email from you describing this before. I had interpreted that the $500/month was just to support code collaborator.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Tom,

So official build infrastructure and a transparent way to perform code reviews on community submissions is not in the project's best interest?

Yes. Hosting, licensing, etc. fees will cost me $500/month or more when I move to colocation. At this point in time, I have not asked the project to fund any of this. Obviously, I would be pleased if they did. But it is up to the PSC to decide what happens with sponsorship funding if/when we receive it.

And frankly, I think $500/month to host 4 machines on a private firewalled VLAN using redundant hardware with automated backup is very competitive.

Sincerely,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 11:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

I saw that you gave a pretty steep price tag to keep a system like this running (was it $500/month?). I don't think that something like this would be in the project's best interest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:28 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Hi everyone,

I can start looking into code review infrastructure once we've got the builds sorted out. The build infrastructure will be moving to a colocation site in a couple of weeks. This will provide sufficient bandwidth and availability to host a code review tool.

Autodesk uses Smart Bear's Code Collaborator http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php. According to their website, the tool is free for Open Source projects. I can set it up in a few weeks so we can try it out. If we don't like it, we can just turf it.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Trevor Wekel

RE: [fdo-internals] RE: fdo installation & build script confusion

Reply Threaded

Hi Tom,

I'm glad this was a misunderstanding. The $500/month I mentioned earlier was to support all of the infrastructure.

Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 26, 2009 9:12 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

I must have misread the email from you describing this before. I had interpreted that the $500/month was just to support code collaborator.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Tom,

So official build infrastructure and a transparent way to perform code reviews on community submissions is not in the project's best interest?

Yes. Hosting, licensing, etc. fees will cost me $500/month or more when I move to colocation. At this point in time, I have not asked the project to fund any of this. Obviously, I would be pleased if they did. But it is up to the PSC to decide what happens with sponsorship funding if/when we receive it.

And frankly, I think $500/month to host 4 machines on a private firewalled VLAN using redundant hardware with automated backup is very competitive.

Sincerely,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 11:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

I saw that you gave a pretty steep price tag to keep a system like this running (was it $500/month?). I don't think that something like this would be in the project's best interest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:28 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Hi everyone,

I can start looking into code review infrastructure once we've got the builds sorted out. The build infrastructure will be moving to a colocation site in a couple of weeks. This will provide sufficient bandwidth and availability to host a code review tool.

Autodesk uses Smart Bear's Code Collaborator http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php. According to their website, the tool is free for Open Source projects. I can set it up in a few weeks so we can try it out. If we don't like it, we can just turf it.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 25, 2009 10:16 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

The process for patches is described on our main trac page: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/. Please continue to follow that for now.

The problem with doing patch reviews using other methods is that there is no public history of the review and so the PSC may not have the information required when considering moving someone from a "Project Contributor" to a "Project Developer".

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:50 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RE: [mapguide-internals] fdo installation & build script confusion

Fair enough!
I think also mapguide debug with fdo release might be a popular
combination....

Looks like it makes more sense that the install script of the fdo
package is updated....

however i had to change the paths in my installations manually a few
times already.
for the build server fixing it in the scripts will be mandatory.

just too bad that in the current devel process i am writing a lot more
messages than the code that needs only little tweaks...
I suggest to consider a synchronuous peer review process where small
patches can be instantly accepted in a brief
chat or skype session after at least 3 people looked at it.

Tom Fukushima wrote: