[fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?

Sat Sep 18 13:41:42 EDT 2010

I like this idea a lot.

It's simple, doesn't require the amount of additional work that tagging
would, and means that for any build you can go back to exactly the source
that created it.

We'll still require branches for major (3.5) releases, and I'd suggest tags
for minor (3.5.1) releases, though branches would be fine here too if
there's a requirement to release patches to minor releases.

Jason

On 18 September 2010 10:15, Trevor Wekel wrote:

> Hmm... I had another idea for the FDO_VERSION and PROVIDERS_VERSION tags.
>  Why don't we just use the "Last Changed Rev:" number from Subversion?  This
> has a few advantages:
>
> * We can automate build number creation very easily using "svn info" and
> some trivial perl scripting
> * We do not have to create tags for each build so there is less work
> involved
> * We always know exactly what version of the source we are dealing with
> * Each number in 3.5.0.0 corresponds to a 16 bit integer (0-65535) so we
> can use the svn version number for a very long time.
>
> Here's the current "svn info" output for branches/3.5.  This would generate
> a build number of 3.5.0.5667 if we use the "Last Changed Rev:" scheme.
>
> Path: 3.5
> URL: http://svn.osgeo.org/fdo/branches/3.5
> Repository Root: http://svn.osgeo.org/fdo
> Repository UUID: d98eaee6-4212-0410-900c-dcc49bf69b99
> Revision: 5667
> Node Kind: directory
> Last Changed Author: trevorwekel
> Last Changed Rev: 5667
> Last Changed Date: 2010-09-17 16:57:10 -0600 (Fri, 17 Sep 2010)
>
> Regards,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
> Sent: September 18, 2010 9:11 AM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Ok.  It looks like we have not created too many numeric tags for FDO 3.5 in
> http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/browser/tags.  Should we create a tag for RC2
> build as 3.5_001 and set the FDO_VERSION and PROVIDERS_VERSION to 0101?
>
> Regards,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Greg Boone
> Sent: September 5, 2010 9:55 AM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> On a side note, I am not sure if you are setting these environment
> variables, They will need to be set for a windows build.
>
> FDO_VERSION=xxxx
> PROVIDERS_VERSION=xxxx
>
> These variables are used to set the FDO binary version information.
>
> An example would be 6001. Where 60 is that build number (associated to the
> tag number) and 01 would be the first iteration of build 60.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
> Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 10:43 AM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Ok.  I will try the 32 bit build.  I am still getting can't open file
> .obj.rsp from boost when running the 64 bit build.  Here are the commands I
> am running on branches/3.5.
>
> svn export svn://localsvnrepo/fdo/branches/3.5 c:\builds\fdo35x64\fdo
>
> cd c:\builds\fdo35x64\fdo
> setenvironment.bat x64
> build_thirdparty.bat -p=x64 -a=buildinstall -o=c:\builds\fdo35x64\install
>
>
> One modification I did make to setenvironment.bat was to update the Visual
> Studio path
>
> SET ACTIVEPATHCHECK="C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC"
>
>
> Regards,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Greg Boone
> Sent: September 3, 2010 3:52 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Hi Trevor,
>
> I tried building boost Win32 on a Win64 OS using the Visual Studio x86
> compiler tools and I didn't encounter any issues.
>
> Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 12:55 AM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I am able to build the following:
>
> Windows: MySQL, ODBC, PostgreSQL, GDAL, KingOracle, OGR, PostGIS, SDF, SHP,
> SQLite, WFS, WMS
>
> Linux: MySQL, ODBC, PostgreSQL*, GDAL, KingOracle, OGR, PostGIS*, SDF, SHP,
> SQLite, WFS, WMS
>
> *For Linux, I may have build issues with PostgreSQL and PostGIS related to
> the Thirdparty pgsql libs.  I get a number of unresolved externals for both
> providers and need to investigate further.
>
>
> Regards,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Greg Boone
> Sent: August 30, 2010 10:07 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Trevor,
>
> What builds (minus ArcSDE) are you capable of posting? Why don't we focus
> on posting what you can build right now.
>
> I can work on posting the ArcSDE libraries once you have posted the main
> build. I can also look to see if I can reproduce the boost x86 issue so you
> can perform the win32 build on your win64 machine.
>
> As for testing, I propose we post and have the community validate.
>
> Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Greg Boone
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:34 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> So a number of submissions have been made lately. Are there any objections
> to having these included in a new candidate build?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 12:35 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
> Hi Jackie,
>
> Your question is timely.  I have been discussing the FDO builds offline
> with Greg and others over the past few months.  Since MapGuide needs FDO for
> Windows and Linux, I thought it was reasonable for me to do the FDO builds
> as well.  I believe there are a few things we need to address:
>
> 1.  Build OS for Windows
>
> Currently, the FDO 3.5 builds are cleaner on a 32 bit OS.  From what I
> recall, one of the third party dependencies (boost?) is a bit out of date
> and gets a little cranky with the (x86) in the path name.  I believe this
> has been resolved in FDO trunk.  The 32/64  bit OS wouldn't normally matter
> but I was foolish enough to install a 64 bit OS on the MapGuide build
> machine.
>
> We have a couple of options available to resolve this:
> a.  Set up a separate build VM for FDO with a 32 bit OS.
> b.  Update the third party libs and compile using the existing MapGuide 64
> bit build VM.
>
> Option a. is cleaner and I think it would be better if FDO had its own
> build machine.  I suppose I can eat the licensing cost (bummer).
>
>
> 2. ArcSDE Providers
>
> I do not have access to ESRI SDKs so I cannot build the ESRI FDO Providers.
>  If someone else in the community would be willing to build the ESRI
> Providers, that would be great.
>
>
> 3. Resourcing
>
> To be honest, I am very busy right now and would welcome a collaborator on
> the FDO builds.  The build infrastructure is web accessible and I would be
> more than willing to give access to anyone able to help out with the FDO
> builds.
>
>
> 4. Build Validation
>
> I am competent in FDO but not an FDO expert.  And with 10(+?) providers to
> test, build validation is a major undertaking.  We should open up a
> discussion on appropriate build validation steps.  Builds are fine.  Builds
> that work are better.
>
>
> Regards,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jackie Ng
> Sent: August 28, 2010 2:45 AM
> To: fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: [fdo-internals] FDO 3.5 final release?
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Is there any word/plans on a final FDO 3.5 release? The download site only
> has the RC1 release and that itself is several months old now.
>
> - Jackie
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/FDO-3-5-final-release-tp5472205p5472205.html
> Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20100918/8994518e/attachment-0001.html