Re: [Cruisecontrol-devel] Things to add to 2.6

[Erskine, C. <chr...@ed...>]

1) I used force since that is how it is discussed in the doco.  Under =
schedule, it states to use JMX interface
to build the project.  Also, in the <modificationset>, one of the =
children elements is <forceonly>.  This feature=20
does something of the same sort although it allow me to use the source =
system that I want and report modifications
back to the publishers.  It is the functionality that I am looking for, =
not the name so if you want to change it, feel
free.
=20
2) I agree that there is something about the two being almost opposites =
but I see them as allowing me to=20
tune the <modificationset> for the scheduler.  Maybe this functionality =
should be on the <schedule> rather than
the <modificationset>.  The <schedule> was the place that I first looked =
for the functionality for this but it comes back
to that pesky <forceonly> tag.  I was thinking about combining them but =
then you would have to make it a tri-state or even=20
quad-state attribute.  This could confuse some people and would break =
any projects that are currently using=20
requiremodification.
=20
3) Towards using the interval time on the scheduler, the manual states =
that 1 week is the largest practical value.
I do not want my deploys building unless I trigger them.  Using an even =
larger interval might be able to be used but
at some time, it is going to trigger and do something that is not =
wanted.
=20
With these thoughts, and your comments, I wonder were this type of =
attribute belongs.  I am thinking it should not be the=20
<modificationset>.  I can see arguments for putting it on either =
<project> or <schedule>.  Both places could fit.  One=20
advantage of placing it on the project is that we can stop the checks =
for changes in the source until the build is forced.  On
the project, it would also fit with the buildafterfailed switch as to =
controlling when the project is built.
=20
If you would like me to try making this change, let me know.  I have a =
little time this week that I could work on this.
=20
=20
Chris Erskine
=20
=20
>From Jtf
=20
1. "force", as in force build, is a project concept. I don't like

that concept leaking into the modifications set.

2. the behavior seems related to requireModifications. in fact the

two are opposites: one lies and says there are modifications even when

there aren't, while the other lies and says there aren't modifications

when there are. can these two be combined into a single attribute?

btw, isn't another way to get the behavior you want to make the

interval on the schedule very long? that's the old school way to do

it... :)

Jtf