lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-lucene build.xml
Date Wed, 27 Feb 2002 17:00:58 GMT
That build.properties in CVS looking like it is always used (because
it's not called .sample or something such) looks like it would confuse
people ("I changed XYZ in build.properties, but it didn't take effect.
Why?"), that's what I was referring to when I said half-baked.
In any case, I'll wait to hear some more opinions.

Otis

--- Erik Hatcher <lists@ehatchersolutions.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Otis Gospodnetic" <otis_gospodnetic@yahoo.com>
> 
> > I do think having defaults in build.xml and not build.properties is
> > better than having defaults in build.properties and that using
> > build.properties for overriding defaults instead of changing
> build.xml
> > is better (simpler for people to do, less error prone, requires
> less
> > knowledge).
> 
> I think there is some confusion.  *Never* have Jon or I suggested
> anything
> about build.xml being edited.  It should *never* be edited by an end
> user
> just simply wanting to build Lucene from source code.  The discussion
> is
> over best practices: whether properties should be in the build.xml or
> default.properties.  Neither of those should be edited by this
> end-user.
> For someone to build and change the destination of the output, he/she
> would
> simply create a build.properties (in both Jon and I's scheme) and set
> that
> one property.  That is all.
> 
> > It would be good if others could share their opinions and votes, so
> > that I can move things out of the half-baked state on build in the
> CVS
> > repository.
> 
> Whats half-baked about it?  Properties are in build.xml now, right? 
> Is
> there still a build.properties?  That won't matter given that the
> properties
> are the same value and Ant has property immutability.  But if
> build.properties is still there, I recommend just removing it or
> renaming
> it.  And certainly Jon's scheme is fine if you choose do so - rename
> build.properties to default.properties, and remove the properties I
> added in
> build.xml.  (keep in mind that I renamed a property or two so that
> the demo
> WAR and my docweb WAR had unique descriptive properties).
> 
>     Erik



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

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


Mime
View raw message