Gregg G. Wonderly wrote:
> Topic tags:[Arch][Wiring][Doc][HW][PM]
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>>Topic tags:[Arch][Wiring][Doc][HW][PM]
>>_______________________________________________
>>Gregg suggests:
>>
>>
>>>ndeed! My personal feeling is that any project that I can't load into my
>>>IDE, (in different projects if command line limits are an issue), and push
>>>the build button on, is not correctly designed. Clearly, building without
>>>an IDE is an advantage. But, I would strongly suggest that the project
>>>really should be buildable with some simple form of
>>>
>>> javac -d classes `find . -name '*.java' -print`
>>
>>Trust me on this one....we're gonna need Ant!
>
>
> And what build tasks are going to be so complicated? Odd jar packaging?
docs build
unit tests
distributions (with proper signing)
webapps
anything that is not just "javac blah blah"
> Building jar files with odd sets of files is about the only thing that seems
> plausible. That is a production issue and shouldn't appear in the project
> structure. Here's my desire... You should always be able to unpack the
> source tree into a directory, and make it know to your IDE. Adding your own
> source files, you should be able to compile into a single directory with
> 'javac -d' command line(s). You should be able to package this directory into
> a jar, and 'go'. You should also be able to provide this directory in your
> classpath to JEMBuilder like tools and get a linked product.
And does Ant make this impossible?
> It should not be necessary for developers to do any kind of manual steps to
> develop with the platform. Now, they might also just put the jars in their
> classpath using the distribution jars. But, if the want/need to customize
> classes therein, or otherwise recompile from source, that should be trivial,
> and just require unpacking the tree.
>
> I am really against leaning against Ant for any configuration management that
> can also be done in the code itself where late binding can yield some other
> advantages.
Who ever said that with Ant based projects you cannot get the sources to
build in an IDE?
Ant is basically an automation system, that can automate the creation of
dists, jars, setting classpaths, etc. It's the most common build system
in Java.
If you have a project with source tree and libs, you need to still add
them to the classpath. With ant it's just "ant", and it's so in
Jbuilder, Eclipse, Netbeans, Jedit, Jext, etc.
I don't see the problem, sorry.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nic...@ap...
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
