On 07/13/2011 04:57 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
On 7/13/2011 9:23 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
On 07/13/2011 03:17 PM, David E Jones wrote:
There was actually a discussion about this on this mailing list.
The consensus seemed to be in favour of what Ganath proposed.
> I though that was unfortunate because have non-source
> directories under an src directory is an annoying practice
> IMO, and I HATE to see that going into the project. I voiced
> that concern but no one else seemed to think it was a big deal.
I agree with David. I could possibly see a src/java src/c src/python
layout, but that is as far as I'm willing to go.
But anyways, ofbiz already *does* split out */test/* stuff into a
separate jar, which is the whole point of the src/ splitting that was
proposed. And I did it without having to change the way anyone did
ofbiz source development. Which is the better thing.
And my suggestions about adding the correct 'spline' stuff to any
loader, is the correct approach as well. Esp. considering that most
loaders already *do* have spline type support.
I don't see the different approaches as "right" or "wrong" - they are
just different.
One of the things I don't like about Adam's approach is how all of the
test classes are in a different package than the classes being tested -
so imports are needed. In the proposed folder structure, test classes
can be in the same package - eliminating the need to import the classes
being tested.
The folder structure being proposed is used in a number of other open
source projects. Right or wrong, it is ubiquitous - and as a result it
is intuitive.
How can one sign and seal a Package then? One a Package is sealed,
you can't add other classes in other jars to it.
