ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <stev...@iseran.com>
Subject Re: "Elements of Ant Style": the ./lib directory
Date Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:58:08 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Gentle" <j.kenneth.gentle@acm.org>
To: "Ant Users List" <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:18 AM
Subject: Re: "Elements of Ant Style": the ./lib directory


> At 11:01 PM 11/3/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Ken Gentle" <j.kenneth.gentle@acm.org>
> >To: <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> >Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 10:07
> >Subject: "Elements of Ant Style": the ./lib directory
> >
> >
> > > I've finally received my copy of "Java Development with Ant", and want
to
> > > thank Steve and Erik for a great reference!
> >
> >we love positive feedback
> >
> > >
> > > I'm generally in agreement with these suggestions, but one stands out
as
> > > diametrically opposed to my common practice.  in section D.4.5,
Directory
> > > Structure, the recommendation is to keep library files "with the
> > > project".  As most projects are managed from some type of SCM tool,
that
> > > kind of implies keeping those lib/jars in the SCM system.
> >
> >not so sure about this kind of feedback tho :)
>
> That's not negative feedback - or it wasn't intended to be.  I was not
> trying to say the practice is bad, or wrong, but that I've used other
> methods to achieve similar results without incorporating jars/olb/.a files
> in the repository.

I know, I was just teasing. And its nice to see people going into the
details of the book and seeing how well it aligns with their own thoughts
and experience, because having been through different projects, you will
know different things which work/dont work.

> Understood.  I'm not advocating "taking what you got", but instead of
> including the libs in the repository, why not include only the information
> about the dependency and pull things together for inclusion at
> deployment/distribution time (or not - one might also include the list of
> dependencies as part of the distribution as installation pre-requisites).

that makes sense. Provided there is enough info in there to get (maybe
build) the versions of dependent libs used in with any build, you dont need
your own copies.

> > > I'm in the process of setting up the build environment for a new
> > > employer/project (why do *I* always seem to end up doing this?),
> >
> >Because (a) you secretly enjoy it or (b) you dont trust anyone else.
>
> Ouch -- that was a rhetorical question.  I don't particularly care for it,
> so it must be that "trust" thing... ;^)

yup

> I need SCM to record the changes in my source and its dependencies.  That
> doesn't necessarily mean I have to keep the libs themselves under SCM.

If you have another way of storing dependency info in SCM, *and* propagating
changes out to all the team, then go for it -and tell us what you did.

-steve



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message