Re: [Ejbca-develop] Source layout structure

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

Good, lets give it a try :)

/Tomas

Stephane Bailliez wrote:

> Tomas Gustavsson wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>> 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?
>
>
> There is no problem browsing the sources, at least for a decent IDE. 
> You are using Eclipse so you can have several modules inside a project 
> and declare dependencies between modules.
> Same for me using Idea.
>
> Compilation is no problem yes we compile everything inside a single 
> modules classes dir like or do exactly the same as it is right now.
> We need to know dependencies anyway, if we don't we have a problem. If 
> we have circular dependencies this most likely indicate a problem.
>
> Common parts are common, and thus stay in the common tree like it is 
> right now (that's the ejb-utils stuff, that is now stored in lib).
>
> What I did the last time while repackaging was stripping out the 
> duplicated classes between jars, what was common is stored in the 
> ejb-utils.jar and stored in lib.
> All ejb jars do have a Class-Path lib/ejb-utils.jar in the manifest 
> and ejb-utils.jar load all other common libraries, thus dependency is 
> resolved.
>
>>> 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/...?
>
>
> Yep looks fine I think.
>
>> 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?
>
>
> Some of it are ok, some are not. I will try switch the simple one asap 
> so that at least we are set for some of them but I needed as well a 
> somewhat clean structure, as we will probably have the need for merge 
> points.
>
>> PS: After tomorrow I will be away three weeks on vacation.
>
>
> Ok, have a nice vacation then, I don't know yet for myself, but that 
> most likely will be august (but preferably september)
>
>