sourcejammer-users

[SourceJammer-users] nice

[Michael C. <me...@in...>]

I just got through the mess of script-repairing and archive-converting 
and am at the point where I get to actually use SJ 1.1.  I like what I 
see.  :)  Keep up the good work.

______________
mike

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Robert M. <rob...@ya...>]

--- Michael Casaday <me...@in...> wrote:
> I just got through the mess of script-repairing and
> archive-converting 
> and am at the point where I get to actually use SJ
> 1.1.  I like what I 
> see.  :)  Keep up the good work.

Great! Thanks, Michael. 

Do I take it that you have just converted your 1.0 SJ
server to 1.1? If you've been using SJ for a project
in "the real world", even a student project, we'd love
to hear about it. We want to put up a page on the site
about people and organizations who are really using
SJ.

I hope the script repairing, etc. was not too bad. Is
there anything in the release package you think needs
improving?

Thanks.

--Rob



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Eric <Eri...@at...>]

Rob,

I've been following your project over the last four months and think that
such a tool has a lot of potential.  You've attracted so many folks in such
a short period of time.  I'm going to be doing some independent software
development and will primarily use open source tools, such as Romain Guy's
excellent Jext editor.  I have followed the Jext project since 1999 and it
has evolved quite nicely.  It will be several months before I get started,
but I'll try and send the group feedback on my development experiences in
using SourceJammer.  I'll probably be using it in a mix of environments,
some Win clients, some Linux clients, and mostly Linux server.  I may even
help write a Jext plug-in to interface directly to SourceJammer in the
future.  Keep up the good work!

Eric
.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert MacGrogan" <rob...@ya...>
To: "Michael Casaday" <me...@in...>; "sourcejammer-users"
<sou...@li...>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice


>
> --- Michael Casaday <me...@in...> wrote:
> > I just got through the mess of script-repairing and
> > archive-converting
> > and am at the point where I get to actually use SJ
> > 1.1.  I like what I
> > see.  :)  Keep up the good work.
>
> Great! Thanks, Michael.
>
> Do I take it that you have just converted your 1.0 SJ
> server to 1.1? If you've been using SJ for a project
> in "the real world", even a student project, we'd love
> to hear about it. We want to put up a page on the site
> about people and organizations who are really using
> SJ.
>
> I hope the script repairing, etc. was not too bad. Is
> there anything in the release package you think needs
> improving?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --Rob
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
> http://greetings.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> SourceJammer-users mailing list
> Sou...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sourcejammer-users

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Robert M. <rob...@ya...>]

Excellent, Eric. Thanks for the positive words. Jext
is definitely cool (I use it all the time) and a SJ
Jext plug-in would be awesome.

--Rob

--- Eric <Eri...@at...> wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I've been following your project over the last four
> months and think that
> such a tool has a lot of potential.  You've
> attracted so many folks in such
> a short period of time.  I'm going to be doing some
> independent software
> development and will primarily use open source
> tools, such as Romain Guy's
> excellent Jext editor.  I have followed the Jext
> project since 1999 and it
> has evolved quite nicely.  It will be several months
> before I get started,
> but I'll try and send the group feedback on my
> development experiences in
> using SourceJammer.  I'll probably be using it in a
> mix of environments,
> some Win clients, some Linux clients, and mostly
> Linux server.  I may even
> help write a Jext plug-in to interface directly to
> SourceJammer in the
> future.  Keep up the good work!
> 
> Eric
> .


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Michael C. <me...@in...>]

Robert MacGrogan wrote:

  > --- Michael Casaday <me...@in...> wrote:
  >
  >>I just got through the mess of script-repairing and
  >>archive-converting
  >>and am at the point where I get to actually use SJ
  >>1.1.  I like what I
  >>see.  :)  Keep up the good work.
  >>
  >
  > Great! Thanks, Michael.
  >
  > Do I take it that you have just converted your 1.0 SJ
  > server to 1.1?

Yes.  More on that below.

  > If you've been using SJ for a project
  > in "the real world", even a student project, we'd love
  > to hear about it. We want to put up a page on the site
  > about people and organizations who are really using
  > SJ.

I've been using it to manage the source for a PHP web app I'm writing
called "Exosaga".  It's a very slow moving pet project that may not
go live for some time now.

I also have two other PHP sites I'll be developing for two separate
clients (I'm an indy web dev guy).  I intend to use SourceJammer to
manage the source files (code and images) for both of these projects.

  > I hope the script repairing, etc. was not too bad. Is
  > there anything in the release package you think needs
  > improving?

It wasn't too bad.  I'm not sure the upgrade path I took was the
smartest, but it seems to have worked just fine.

I made a backup of my Tomcat and SJ 1.0 installs and tried to use the
sourcejammer-server-1.1.beta.2-conv.tar.gz package to convert to 1.1.
This didn't seem to work so well.  I was receiving strange errors
involving unfound conf files with paths like "c:\blah\blah" -- even
though I was running the server on Linux -- when I tried to log in
with the 1.1 SJ client.

So I trashed the upgraded installs and instead did a fresh Tomcat
3.2.4 and SJ 1.1 install.  This time it worked fine, but I still
needed my old archives.  I copied the relevant archive files and
directories over from my backup into the fresh install and ran the
convert script that came with the upgrade package.  I've been humming
along nicely since.

My biggest complaint is about the errors in the shell scripts for the
Linux packages. These have already been covered in detail earlier on
this list (/bin vs. /lib and the missing mail.jar and activation.jar
paths). They are a relatively minor annoyance but if they weren't
there SJ would be a LOT simpler to set up.

While I'm giving input I should also mention that it would be nice if
you could see all version comments at the same time when you view a
file's details.  So, instead of just displaying a list of versions
with the version number, date, and user you would also have a field
showing the associated comment.  This way you could see all of the
comments at once instead of having to select an entry and click "View
Comment" for each version.

  > Thanks.
  >
  > --Rob

____________________
mike

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Robert M. <rob...@ya...>]

Hi, Michael.

Thanks for the feedback. See comments below.

<snip>

>   > If you've been using SJ for a project
>   > in "the real world", even a student project,
> we'd love
>   > to hear about it. We want to put up a page on
> the site
>   > about people and organizations who are really
> using
>   > SJ.
> 
> I've been using it to manage the source for a PHP
> web app I'm writing
> called "Exosaga".  It's a very slow moving pet
> project that may not
> go live for some time now.
> 
> I also have two other PHP sites I'll be developing
> for two separate
> clients (I'm an indy web dev guy).  I intend to use
> SourceJammer to
> manage the source files (code and images) for both
> of these projects.

Cool. Thanks a lot for letting me know. 

> I made a backup of my Tomcat and SJ 1.0 installs and
> tried to use the
> sourcejammer-server-1.1.beta.2-conv.tar.gz package
> to convert to 1.1.
> This didn't seem to work so well.  I was receiving
> strange errors
> involving unfound conf files with paths like
> "c:\blah\blah" -- even
> though I was running the server on Linux -- when I
> tried to log in
> with the 1.1 SJ client.
> 
> So I trashed the upgraded installs and instead did a
> fresh Tomcat
> 3.2.4 and SJ 1.1 install.  This time it worked fine,
> but I still
> needed my old archives.  I copied the relevant
> archive files and
> directories over from my backup into the fresh
> install and ran the
> convert script that came with the upgrade package. 
> I've been humming
> along nicely since.

It definitely sounds like I need to do some more work
on the Linux release packages. I will try to repair
all these problems before I do the 1.1 final release.
Glad you were able to get up and running eventually,
though.

> 
> My biggest complaint is about the errors in the
> shell scripts for the
> Linux packages. These have already been covered in
> detail earlier on
> this list (/bin vs. /lib and the missing mail.jar
> and activation.jar
> paths). They are a relatively minor annoyance but if
> they weren't
> there SJ would be a LOT simpler to set up.

I will fixe all these.

> 
> While I'm giving input I should also mention that it
> would be nice if
> you could see all version comments at the same time
> when you view a
> file's details.  So, instead of just displaying a
> list of versions
> with the version number, date, and user you would
> also have a field
> showing the associated comment.  This way you could
> see all of the
> comments at once instead of having to select an
> entry and click "View
> Comment" for each version.

That's a good suggestion. I'm not 100% sure whether or
not I'll implement that one, though. Perhaps I could
make in a config option for the "details" dialog. What
I'm worried about is downloading unnecessary
information for people with slow connections. 

One other change I'm thinking about making to the GUI
(for 1.2) is changing the date that's displayed in the
file list from the create date to the last-modified
date. I think that would probably be a much more
useful piece of information to see.

Thanks for your feedback and thanks for using
SourceJammer.

--Rob


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Stan W. <won...@ya...>]

Robert MacGrogan wrote:

<snip
> 
> One other change I'm thinking about making to the GUI
> (for 1.2) is changing the date that's displayed in the
> file list from the create date to the last-modified
> date. I think that would probably be a much more
> useful piece of information to see.
> 

      Yes, that would definitely be better.  The create
      date is "ancient" history.  It's more relevant to
      me to know when something was last modified.
      This would be an excellent improvement from my
      perspective.