Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Rafael Schloming
Robert Godfrey wrote: I don't wish to overcomplicate, but do you want some grouping of features... (e.g. a parentFeature tag) if we're looking at the same sort of granularity as unit tests, that should be quite fine... but many of them may be aspects of the same "feature"... Quite possibly. I

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Robert Godfrey
I don't wish to overcomplicate, but do you want some grouping of features... (e.g. a parentFeature tag) if we're looking at the same sort of granularity as unit tests, that should be quite fine... but many of them may be aspects of the same "feature"... -- Rob 2010/1/6 Rafael Schloming > Alan

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Rafael Schloming
Alan Conway wrote: On 01/06/2010 06:52 AM, Robert Godfrey wrote: 2010/1/6 Rafael Schloming Robert Godfrey wrote: Overall I think with a bit of work from both the C++ and Java communities we can get the brokers to look and behave much more similarly... however we will also need to change th

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Alan Conway
On 01/06/2010 06:52 AM, Robert Godfrey wrote: 2010/1/6 Rafael Schloming Robert Godfrey wrote: Overall I think with a bit of work from both the C++ and Java communities we can get the brokers to look and behave much more similarly... however we will also need to change the way we work a bit so

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Robert Godfrey
2010/1/6 Rafael Schloming > Robert Godfrey wrote: > >> Overall I think with a bit of work from both the C++ and Java communities >> we >> can get the brokers to look and behave much more similarly... however we >> will also need to change the way we work a bit so that when we decide to >> add >>

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Rafael Schloming
Robert Godfrey wrote: Overall I think with a bit of work from both the C++ and Java communities we can get the brokers to look and behave much more similarly... however we will also need to change the way we work a bit so that when we decide to add new features we attempt to discuss and agree bef

Re: C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-06 Thread Gordon Sim
On 01/04/2010 04:27 PM, Robert Godfrey wrote: Happy New Year all... So, at the start of this new year I think it is important that we try to focus on improving the experience of our project... and in particular I think we should be looking at making the project look like a single coherent whole.

C++ and Java Broker common configuration and tooling

2010-01-04 Thread Robert Godfrey
Happy New Year all... So, at the start of this new year I think it is important that we try to focus on improving the experience of our project... and in particular I think we should be looking at making the project look like a single coherent whole. Currently the Java and C++ Brokers look and be