Mark Hindess wrote:
> On 16 June 2006 at 6:37, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>> 3) Currently the 'build' target automatically does a 'clean'. I think
>>> this dependency should be removed and a new target - 'dist' perhaps? -
>>> should be created for doing non-incremental builds.
>>>
>>> [Geir has already fixed the first part of this since I started writing
>>> this.]
>> I don't like "dist" - to me that's been traditionally reserved for
>> making a distribution (funny that...).
>
> dist was just the first thing I thought of but you are correct it isn't
> quite right.
>
>> Maybe "rebuild"?
>
> That would do.
>
>>> 4) Also at the module level, I think we should compress the two layers
>>> of make/build.xml and make/common/build.xml. For one thing it is very
>>> confusing, that:
>>>
>>> a) modules/auth/make/common/build.xml builds the platform-specific
>>> java code, and
>>>
>>> b) modules/luni/make/platform seems to be related to what we've been
>>> calling native code not about platform-specific java code.
>>>
>>> It would be crazy to separate building of platform-specific and
>>> platform-independent java code because we'll only have problems
>>> handling dependencies and it would mean a lot of duplication.
>>>
>>> Even if we renamed 'platform' to native, I still don't think the
>>> separate build.xml is needed since all it would ever do - in the near
>>> future when we start moving the native code - is call straight out to
>>> a makefile (or configure or whatever) so I don't think this extra
>>> layer would add much.
>> I lazily decided not to parse this, but I've been w/ you so far so I'm
>> sure it's fine.
>
> Don't blame you. ;-)
>
>> But please... Please... Please....
>>
>> s/hy/harmony/
>
> I'll let you and Tim argue that one. /me lights touch paper and runs ;-)
The Readability Battle of 2006 has begun!
>
>>> 8) Running "ant -f make/build.xml" from a module sub-directory doesn't
>>> actually clean the main compiled classes.
>> As it shouldn't IMO..
>
> Sorry I wasn't clear on this. I was thinking:
>
> <delete failonerror="false">
> <fileset dir="${hy.build}"
> includesfile="${hy.nio}/make/patternset.txt" />
> </delete>
>
> which is to say, delete the things that this module created.
Right - I just meant that "clean" shouldn't be default action.
>
>>> (I think this is pretty
>>> important to getting consistent expected behaviour so I'm looking at
>>> this right now and will fix it shortly unless anyone shouts.)
>
> And now I have a patch ready to go in.
>
>>> Well, these are some of the things that are bothering me. I suspect
>>> others have other issues?
>> Yes. It bugs me to no end that "build" isn't where we keep build
>> stuff. It may simply be because I've hung around Jakarta and related
>> too long, but the convention I'm used to is "build" is where build
>> stuff goes (don't use "make") and "target" is the created directory
>> where the build churn happens.
>
> When I was looking at the commons projects I'm sure there was a mixture
> of both build and target for built artifacts. I'm easy. (Tim:
> specifically about this not in general. ;-p )
>
>> This really is an aesthetic rather than technical argument, and so
>> I've kept my mouth shut until now, but I've decided to come out on
>> this one here... :)
>
> I've never been very good at "keeping my mouth shut", I really don't no
> how people manage it. ;-)
It's a useful skill. I've had to work on it a long time, and still
working on it...
geir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
