I get the port parameter, and I could buy adding the -configfile parameter. But why do you need to pass the headless argument?

I run CC on linux and don't have any issues with it. Patches are welcome.

Also, I am not sure that cruisecontrol:run should be your primary way of starting up Cruisecontrol. It maybe, though I am not certain, that the intent is to provide a way to test your config file by starting up CC and seeing if it validates everything.

Vincent,

I think cruisecontrol-run was your inspiration. Do you mind discussing how you use it? I am assuming as a shortcut for debugging your configuration file, versus as your standard way of running CC? There are some other properties that should propbably be added by default like the rmiport as well. Additionally, with the new Jetty bundled version, maybe we would want to use that instead?

Why couldn't (shouldn't) it be the standard way of running CC? You have to seed CC's checkout directory anyway, why not go a step, or two, further and use that seeded code to run cruisecontrol:configure, for each seeded project (assuming all projects point to the same config.xml) and then do a cruisecontrol:run to kick things off? I think that would be ideal.

Hi David,

I don't really use CC ATM. I've created it because I thought it was missing. If properties are missing they should be added. I just implemented a first version. I'm not aware of the "new Jetty bundled version" but maybe there's a better way of doing it? What I think is nice is the ability to start it from the Maven build.

It has always bothered me that CC was started as a command line deamon and that you need a separate reporting webapp. Look at luntbuild which has everything in one. Much easier. Maybe the new "jetty bundled" stuff is meant to do that?