I agree that the current build structure is poor and what your proposing has
merit, but it requires that modules main branch be in step with the JBoss server
main branch which may not be workable as module owners come and go and
work progresses at an independent rate.
There should be a stronger dependency management capability using
the Java2 package versioning scheme or an extension thereof.
One cause of the current structure is the desire to have JBossXX modules
be independent entities. For example, the JNDI naming service can be
used standalone. Likewise, JBossMQ has a standalone mode, but
it does require a minimal JBossServer to live in. Other modules like
JBossSX are pure dependent modules of JBoss.
The first issue to address is whether modules like JBossMQ should continue
to be standalone modules that one can download and build/run independent
of the JBoss server core.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "jboss-dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 1:00 PM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Directory structure of jboss projects.
> Hi,
>
> Obviously this is not the most important thing to do, and I'm not sure how
> to do this within cvs, but I'm going to talk about this anyway.
>
> I think there are some (potential) configuration management problems with
> the way the directory structure of the jboss development environment is
> laid out. There are many copies of the build system (ant++++), jboss
> derived jars scattered around, copies of external jars in many places, and
> no obvious way to build each subproject only from source and jars you
> personally just compiled. The many copies of the environment makes
> upgrading, well, difficult to know when you're done, not to mention
> checking out a project slooooooow.
>
>
> So here is a suggestion:
>
> dev (user supplies this directory)
> build-lib (contains ant.jar, xml parsers)
> build (contains system-wide build.xml that builds all subprojects in
> order using (i think) antcall)
> dist (contains complete working jboss from running system wide script or
> all subproject scripts)
> lib (contains external jars such as jmxri.jar)
> jbossxxproject (main jboss project would become e.g. jbosscore and follow
> same structure)
> build (class files end up here, as now)
> dist (jars end up here, as now)
> jboss-dependencies (jars from other jboss subprojects. Hopefully this
> is unnecessary)
> src
> build (subproject ant script)
> main (source code as today)
>
>
>
> Subproject build scripts could put the resulting jars into dev/dist/.
>
> I think keeping track of jboss-dependencies is a good idea. I don't know a
> good way to do it. Symlinks from the proposed jboss-dependencies would
> work on linux-like systems but I think they aren't available in windows(?)
>
> Does anyone else think there is a problem and/or this is a solution? Is it
> worth my time experimenting with how to set this up? Suggestions? Flames?
>
> Thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
