Vincent,
Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi,
All Maven subprojects respect (AFAIK) the common directory structure
[1] of Maven. IMHO Maven sell speech is about convention, and Maven
should be the first place where it would be applied. There is nothing
about properties files in our convention [2], but I suggest to revert
these changes to respect our lazy convention.
I also respect the conventions, but in this particular case the
convention became counter-productive: I externalized all the messages
into Messages.properties file per package and have to modify this file
all the time.
If this file sits in the src/main/java/... package - it's one mouse
click in Eclipse to open it. If I move it to src/main/resources/.. - it
becomes a multi-click - one has to click as many times as there are
members in the package name, because Eclipse does not respect "flatten
packages" preference for "empty" packages, and folder without java files
in it is treated as "empty". So it's 5-8 code clicks instead on one.
Again - conventions should promote development, not hinder it, every
mouse click matters. In this particular case I think we should modify
the required convention. We should promote the file system separation
for real resources. And have a slack where they really are used during
development, and separation makes work harder, without a clear benefit.
Also, I notified that some static final variables are not in upper
case (ie AbstractAntTask) like defined in [2]. I know that Herv� tried
to fix them. Could you take care of it in the future?
I certainly will take care of that in the future.
Finally, I saw that all private variables start with a low line. I
already used this rule in the past and I like this idea, but Maven
projects don't use it.
If you think that our convention [2] should be improved feel free to ask on dev@
I agree, will ask on the list.
I think that being religious about small things is bad - let's respect
the spirit of the convention: being productive. And I don't see how
making field visually different hurts - convention does not mandate any
style here except for common sense - name variables not like classes.
I first caught it from Jetty community and saw that it helps me to
better understand the code by just looking at it. But on the other hand
- it may irritate some people, because creating mutators for such fields
requires a little more work - IDE (at least Eclipse) does not support it
directly. So it's really - a personal preference: one would prefer code
visual clarity, someone else - ease of creation in IDE.
But again - let's discuss it.
Thanks,
Oleg
Cheers,
Vincent
[1]
http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-standard-directory-layout.html
[2] http://maven.apache.org/developers/conventions/code.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
