Re: [Ejbca-develop] Source layout structure

[Tomas G. <to...@pr...>]

Stephane Bailliez wrote:

> Is there anyone against the fact of having module sources inside their 
> modules ?
>
> I would like to avoid having a whole tree of sources somewhere without 
> any real idea of dependencies as can quickly become problematic during 
> coding and packaging. It's easy to become sloppy and it is difficult 
> to manage dependencies and structure with a common source tree.
>
> Therefore in the close/medium future I would like to move 
> se.anatom.ejbca.keyrecovery to the keyrecovery directory tree etc... 
> Each war and jar is a module anyway.
>
Structuring is good and I agree about dependencies in general. The 
cleaner the better. I guess you mean that path will move from 
src/java/se/anatom/ejbca/keyrecovery to 
src/keyrecovery/java/se/anatom/ejbca/keyrecovery?

It is not 100% clear to me that the extreme split up will only be 
positive though. It will be more difficult to browse sources and get a 
good overview. The modules have dependencies to one another, hopefully 
only throught interfaces but still. How will the packaging and 
compilation be done? Build jar for each module using other jars in 
classpath? Or will one jar collect classes from several modules? And 
what about the common parts?

> In the very short term I plan to commit command line sources to 'cli', 
> it is a bit refactor and use commons-cli to better manage command line 
> options:
> Structure would then become:
> src/cli/src/main --> main source tree
> src/cli/src/test   --> junit test case (hopefully)
>
The structure seems unessecary long to me, I assume the full path to a 
class will be something like src/cli/src/main/se/...? The double 'src' 
seems redundant. How about doing it like in ejbca/src today with 
src/cli/java/... and src/cli/test/...?

In what shape is the XDoclet stuff now? That would be a good combination 
with the above, since it should cut the number of classes to something 
like half the current cumber?

Cheers,
Tomas

PS: After tomorrow I will be away three weeks on vacation.