[mapguide-internals] Build Server - structures created and used by the build process and released packages need consistent definition including FDO

[UV]

INCONSISTENCIES in the BULD

I just made the first succcesful build on the build server..... but I 
needed to fix a build script.

We already mentioned the different directory structures for the 
different approaches to create a Mapguide OS server.
There is another one when we copy the released FDO distribution 
fdosdk-win32-3.4.0.tgz into the FDO dir.
In this case  the Postbuild.mak fails as it expects the binaries in a 
bin\release folder but this is not the structure from the FDO release.

I believe this is pretty much the same discrepancy between the dir 
structures of the released builds and the build structures out of visual 
studio.
Because this is inconsistent everyone will fail and has to fix manually 
when trying different approaches.

We need a spec for:
*Directory structure of the server after install.
*Directory structure of FDO SDK for Mapguide build.
*Directory structure of Installation target for FDO build.

Now that Jason introduced a third way of setting up the installed server 
its time to write a spec which is agreed on and implemented on all ends.
Elements of the build process needing alignment to the new dir structures:

*Installer scripts (WIX)
*Visual Studio builds (Postbuild.mak) also for FDO!
*Makefiles for Linux builds
*Released packages (mapguideopensource, fdo etc)

I think we have reached a point where we have to accept that we need 
some specs to define the build interfaces to FDO and align FDO accordingly.
Thats exactly what the build server is for..... defining how it all is 
supposed to work together!
We talked about the external link to FDO in the repo... thats a good start.
We have to align also the  various build processes and define a final 
structure as there is no clear one so far.

I am not sure if this part should be left for after 2.1 as the confused 
dir structure caused by different sources for the components are a real 
nuisance.

I will start an RFC for that so we can collect the inputs.
==> RFC 62 


IMPORTANT ISSUE
the cruise control scripts have to go into the respository also....
There is no point in using a build server if there is no revision 
control on the build server configuration!
It is part of the system.

Happy Easter