Already done. :-) I'm just doing a little testing before I commit. Daniel
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Alex Boisvert <[email protected]>wrote: > My thinking exactly. You want me to do the legwork? > > alex > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Daniel Spiewak <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Of course, there is a rather serious downside to giving SCALA_HOME > > precedence: we lose a lot of configurability. The user would have to > > actually *unset* ENV['SCALA_HOME'] if they really wanted to have > > scala.version become the dominant, and that seems hacky. Since most > users > > aren't going to set scala.version unless they really need it, maybe we * > > should* go with it as the primary. > > > > Daniel > > > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Daniel Spiewak <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Right now, we have the rest of the code set so that SCALA_HOME takes > > > precedence over scala.version. I would personally prefer to leave it > > this > > > way, since FSC is unavailable when we use the Maven artifacts. > > > > > > Whatever we decide, I think Scala.version should reflect the same > > > precedence that `compile` does (the current version in trunk/ does > not). > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Alex Boisvert <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Alex Boisvert < > [email protected] > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Daniel Spiewak <[email protected] > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> I seem to be having problems resolving the JavaTestFilter class in > > >> trunk > > >> >> when running Buildr against a Specs-using Scala project. It worked > > >> fine > > >> >> before I merged the latest from trunk into my fork, and there are > no > > >> >> problems under JRuby (just MRI). Has anyone else seen/seeing this > or > > >> is > > >> >> it > > >> >> an issue which is peculiar to my system? > > >> >> > > >> > > > >> > It appears to be another issue related to RJB bootstrap, not that > > you've > > >> > removed Java.load from version_str. I think RJB blacklists the > > package > > >> > "scala." since it's not found the first time it looks for it. > > >> > > > >> > I think we're trying to be too smart with the Scala detection, > > >> considering > > >> > the limitations of RJB. > > >> > > > >> > Having spent too much time on this already, I think we should remove > > >> > Scala.version_str entirely (well, for backward compatibility we > could > > >> > redirect to Scala.version) and Scala.version should: > > >> > > > >> > 1) check if SCALA_HOME is defined, if so use the value from > > >> > library.properties, > > >> > > > >> > 2) check if build setting 'scala.version' is defined, if so return > it > > >> > > > >> > 3) or else, return Scala.DEFAULT_VERSION > > >> > > > >> > This would fix another issue where Scala.version could potentially > > >> return a > > >> > version different from the one pointed by SCALA_HOME. > > >> > > > >> > What do you think? > > >> > > > >> > > >> Sorry... changed my mind. > > >> > > >> I think it should be: > > >> > > >> 1) check if build setting 'scala.version' is defined, if so return it. > > >> > > >> 2) check if SCALA_HOME is defined, if so use the value from > > >> library.properties, > > >> > > >> 3) or else, return Scala.DEFAULT_VERSION > > >> > > >> I think the project's 'scala.version' should override SCALA_HOME. As > > an > > >> optimization, if both 'scala.home' and SCALA_HOME agree on the > version, > > we > > >> could use artifacts from SCALA_HOME instead of downloading them from a > > >> remote repo. > > >> > > >> alex > > >> > > > > > > > > >
