>>> Paul Kinnucan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10-Nov-00 7:09:59 PM >>>
>Imagine this scenario. A user replaces the standard
>jde-compile.el with your version. I make a change to
>the standard jde-compile.el in the next release.
<snip>
Absolutely. That's why I haven't actually asked you to put it in JDE
yet.
When the people testing it get back to me I'll send you a nicely
packaged, seperate, file in the way you require.
>>Trouble is that if you have any relative paths set then it won't
>>compile properly.
>I can't accept changes that break existing functionality.
So how do *you* intend to deliver relative paths? As soon as you say
"relative paths are resolved to root X" then you break the existing
functionality.
And what you're saying is, unless I take the relative stuff out, or
do all the work on the rest of the JDE, I can't contribute my
alternative compile stuff?
>You are really talking about making three distinct changes
>to the JDE:
>1) Support for differing compiler options and syntaxes
>2) Support for relative paths
>3) Support for master prj.el files.
1 and 2 yes... with 3 I am seeking ideas. Some people have kindly
sent me some ideas which I am going to investigate.
>3) The implementation should be done in such a way that
>the root does not have to be the location of the prj.el file but
>could be based on some other location specified by the user
>or determined automatically in some other way.
Anybody reading this have any ideas about what they might want as a
relative root?
I'd suggest one could select from either:
- location of project file
- car of debug source directory list
- environment variable
I'm happy to help with doing this work... as you know I've already
done compilation which is not most of the work but is a large part of
it.
>Finally, with regard to master prj.el files, I have already
suggested
>a soluion which is to insert a function at the end of each prj.el
file
>that loads a master file from a specified loactions. This master
file
>would contain overrides of settings in the local file, eg.
Yes... I thought about that. I don't think that's the right way... it
seems to me that the project file should be superior. The "master"
file should be used for site-local definitions, like the sort of VM
being used.
I'm going to experiment with setting variables in .emacs and having
prj.el not override the value when the prj.el value is the default.
Nic
