On Mar 25, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Robert Muir wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I do think we need standalone artifacts. So, I suppose if we do that, then >> we can't just svn export, b/c we would need to separate dev tools per >> project. But, then again, why can't we have: >> /dev-tools/ >> /lucene/dev-tools >> /solr/dev-tools >> >> The top level just creates IDE that includes the lower ones, but the lower >> ones can each be standalone. (This goes for the Maven stuff too). >> >> I realize, of course, this is work, so my suggestion would be we do 3.1 w/ >> it included as is and then fix in the next release. >> > > I would be against this. currently to fix eclipse i just copy the > .classpath file to /dev-tools/eclipse/dot.classpath and commit. This > makes it significantly harder. > Additionally I don't see how this could possibly work: a "standalone" > solr would use lucene jar files since it doesnt include the lucene > source. > Because of this, a "top-level" dev-tools eclipse configuration would > not be the composition of lucene+solr, instead it would be a totally > different thing.
Solr would just include the whole tree. Lucene could then just deliver Lucene. > > So I don't think this is useful: dev-tools is for developers, Right. People who take the source are developers, no? As it is now, we ship them a broken build system. > and > developers are all using the big /trunk checkout, so we don't need > dev-tools at a lower level, for no good reason. > > Honestly I could care less about making it easy for someone to > configure lucene or solr by itself in their IDE. I did the eclipse > work (for example) to make it easier for people to contribute to > lucene/solr, I could care less about making it easier for people to > configure their "own private copies" of lucene or solr easier, and I'm > definitely not going to let it make it *harder* on us to support > contributions (the top-level /dev-tools). > Yes, but isn't the way people start making contributions at first by taking the source from a release and working on it? Isn't that the point of the src release? (Other than the ASF requires it) > This is becoming a slippery slope fast... Uwe's perspective is > starting to become much more attractive. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > -------------------------- Grant Ingersoll http://www.lucidimagination.com/ Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
