If you are reading the commits list, you will have noticed that I've been making a few improvements to the ant scripts in classlib. I've still got a way to go before I've finished the refactoring but I've already started wondering about doing the same thing for jdktools.
But the question that sprang to mind was why am I doing it twice. Why not just have the jdktools modules as modules in classlib? You don't really lose anything in modularity since all classlib modules can be checked out alone and built against an hdk. I think we'd gain in that jdktools might get a little more attention if it was built and tested with classlib[0]. (Currently it would break quite a few ports since samsa seems to have quite a few linux-isms. I'll fix these shortly though.) Of course, it adds a little (20M on top of 250M) to the checkout footprint and the build/test takes a little longer so there is a downside. I've read the original thread[1] but I still don't see a good argument[2] for this separation. What do other people think? Regards, Mark. [0] and trunk -> branches/java6 merged with classlib [1] http://markmail.org/thread/l44kkyiom45ks6e6 [2] That thread did contain an argument but not a good one and not one related to this topic. ;-)
