[mapguide-internals] [fdo-internals] build script confusion RFC62???

[Hugues Wisniewski]

Hi,

I don't understand the 11g subfolder in CsMap
What is it?
Thanks

Hugues

-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 6:22 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List; FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] [fdo-internals] build script confusion RFC62???

Hi UV,

There is a key difference between a build tree and an install tree that needs to be taken into consideration.  For a build tree, you may have to build four different configurations - 32 bit debug, 32 bit release, 64 bit debug, and 64 bit release.  For the install tree, you will likely only been installing either 32 bit release or 64 bit release.

The server and web extensions also need to be built into separate trees because IIS and Apache need virtual directories to work with and the ajax/fusion viewers need a specific directory layout to find everything they need.

I like the idea of having a common directory structure:

1.  Copying a bunch of web files to some directory IIS or Apache likes is a hassle.  I know Walt always used to give me trouble about the way the web extensions was laid out.  It would be better if we could just point IIS or Apache at an appropriately laid out directory.

2. Co-developing MapGuide and Fdo functionality is freaking annoying.  Build Fdo, build -c install Fdo, copy Fdo dlls and headers to where MapGuide wants them, then build MapGuide.  Yuck.   

Can anyone think of other requirements on a common build/install directory structure for MapGuide (server/web) and Fdo?

The following structure isn't right yet but it does introduce some symmetry between components and separates out the different build flavours.  The Web bit is definitely not right from a symmetry argument. All the separate Bin directories make this structure a no-go without setting path variables.  And the question what about Linux? comes to mind.

Release
  CSMap
    11g
    Bin
    Lib
    Inc
    Obj
  Fdo
    com
    Bin
    Inc 
    Obj
      [subprojects]
    Lib
  Platform (shared dlls for Server/Web)
    Bin
    Inc
    Lib
    Obj
      [subprojects] 
  Server
    Bin
    Lib   
    Obj
      [subprojects] 
    Logs
    Packages
    Repositories
    Resources
    Schema
    Wfs
    Wms
  Web
    Apache2 (if built)
    Php
    www
  WebStudio
    ???
Debug
  Fdo
  Platform
  Server
  Web
  WebStudio
Release64
Debug64


-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 4:41 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] build script confusion RFC62???

thanks, thats the way the decision can be made.

But first people have to agree what needs to be done. In the current 
situation there are little inconsistencies which make our life hard.
I am sure the core team has their systems set up long enough that they 
dont know about these things anymore.
I do because I struggled hard to get the build running in the first place.
Trying to get the build server to do this now is pointing out the exact 
details of where the problems are.


Tom Fukushima wrote:
> Hi UV,
>
> The process for RFCs is described on this page: http://mapguide.osgeo.org/psc.html.
>
> Is this what you're looking for?
>
> Cheers
> Tom
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of UV
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 7:38 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] build script confusion RFC62???
>
> Is there a way to initiate as decision process?
> or do we have to give up on the automated build because no decision can 
> be made regarding the result of the build?
> This is needed before any changes can be made.
>
> Its not so much todo except to agree on a useful structure for the build 
> / deploy process.
> In the moment we have a windows installer, a postbuild.mak and a 
> build.bat plus Linux makefiles all doing similar but slightly different 
> things.
>
> I think this is a unique opportunity to align some of the 
> inconsistencies in the build process of mapguide and
> improve the experience for future contributions.
>
> Thats exactly whats CI is for..... making sure such inconcistencies will 
> never happen again.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>   

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals