Caolan McNamara wrote:
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 09:54 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
FYI: <http://odftoolkit.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=32>
Yeah, I'm very much in favour of this myself. Split the build into two
parts the API stable ure stuff, and the rest. I'm trying to home-brew
some hackery to fake this up.
The current practical problems are of course as listed above and
[...]
So it's certainly kludgy to try and do it right now, but is a very
attractive goal for me to be able to just rebuild the portion of OOo
affected by whatever bug I've just fixed. And a nice thin edge of a
wedge to make OOo more modular at build-time as well as at runtime.
C.
I also like the idea to modularize products and packages. But I am no
friend of splitting it at build time, at least now.
For one I still remember times when we here at Sun Hamburg practized
such a split between SDK and rest of office. It was quite some effort to
reach that split (f.e. separating idl files into two separate modules,
'udkapi' and 'offapi') and some effort to mainatain it. It was unhandy
to work with. And we gained nearly nothing. So in the end we again
merged both workspaces into one.
Second reason is that (curently) this does not fit our development
stile. We do childworkspaces feature wise. With the current degree of
code mudularity this quite often means to work on base (URE) modules
providing some new functionality and applications where you want to use
that in one childworkspace.
So, yes, it may be an attractive goal. But we should start with package
restructuring and more code modularity. Stick with building on one
workspace for now.
Rüdiger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
