beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eddie O'Neil <ekon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Beehive/tooling issue
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2005 13:50:10 GMT
  I'd fix it too.  :)  It makes sense to have the generated
struts-config files end up in WEB-INF/classes because they're really
not meant to be read / write configuration files (like web.xml or
beehive-netui-config.xml).

  Also, better to ship 1.0 without having to change the behavior later.

  Will take a look over the patch...

Eddie


On 9/9/05, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK, I've added a patch for this in the bug.  Feel free to give it a good
> once-over.
> 
> I'm running tests now -- looks OK so far.  The only ill effect of this
> change is one which would only get worse over time (the longer we wait
> to do it): for *legacy* apps, where the root Struts-config file path is
> specified in web.xml, we can no longer honor that path when we generate
> the file.  In these apps, you will get an error logged at Servlet
> startup about Struts not being able to load the file (though everything
> does work fine).
> 
> Rich
> 
> Rich Feit wrote:
> 
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I just entered http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEEHIVE-915 : Page
> >Flow annotation processors generate files in an IDE-unfriendly way.  It
> >turns out that the way we generate files when running under apt works
> >fine on the command line, but makes it hard for an IDE (implementing the
> >Mirror interfaces) to know when/where our generated files are created.
> >
> >This from the bug:
> >
> >"Unfortunately, [apt's] Filer offers only two choices of places to
> >create files: the source directory and the build directory. This means
> >that to fix this bug, our generated files need to move out of WEB-INF,
> >into WEB-INF/classes, i.e., they will not only be generated into a
> >different place, but they will be read through a different mechanism in
> >the runtime."
> >
> >So, this is definitely not a trivial change.  I am working on the fix
> >for this, and I'd like to have the discussion about whether to get it
> >into v1.0.  If we don't, v1.0 won't be toolable in an IDE.
> >Additionally, it could cause back-compat problems between this and the
> >next version, if people begin to depend on our current location for
> >generated files.  On the other hand, it's a risky change in that we
> >don't have a lot of time to have people hammer on this.  The one saving
> >grace is that the file location is so fundamental that presumably, any
> >bug would cause blatantly bad behavior across the framework.
> >
> >Let me know what you think.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Rich
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message