myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Schofield <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: build.default.properties
Date Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:49:41 GMT
Bill,

I see your point but I think that this goal should apply to the
tomahawk subproject.  IMO it doesn't make much sense to support
building impl without also building api.  Why would you ever separate
the two (even for testing?)

I definitely see the advantage in compiling tomahawk against RI and
MyFaces and there is support for that now.  Being able to compile imp
using an api.jar is tricky because what if I just want to runt the
"compile" target.  Then there is no myfaces-api.jar to run against ...

I think test cases for each subproject would be good.  (There is a
small number of legacy ones and they have not been ported over.)  I
don't have any bright ideas at the moment.

What to do you think about all of this?

sean

On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <bdudney@mac.com> wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> Perhaps I misunderstand the reasoning behind the sub-projects.
> 
> What I expected was that each subproject was build-able on its own as
> a 'deliverable' chunk. If I wanted to I could grab the sub-projects
> I'm interested in and work only with those (i.e. if I only care about
> impl I could have an api.jar file around and work on the impl code
> alone).
> 
> Do I have it wrong? If so no big deal I can go work in current for now.
> 
> The use case is for testing purposes. I'd like to have a set of tests
> for api, a set for impl etc. Then the new developer to myfaces can
> make a change in one of the subproject, run the tests there and be
> relatively sure that they have not broken anything. Its part of the
> safety net concept we talked about before the reorg got started.
> 
> TTFN,
> 
> -bd-
> 
> 
> On Jul 7, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
> 
> >> The problem is I've got shared checked out as 'myfaces-shared'
> >> instead of shared so the shared.src.dir property points to the wrong
> >> spot.
> >>
> >
> > Why did you do this?  The "suggested" approach is to check out using
> > the *current* shortcut.  (I'm working on the documentation for that
> > now btw.)
> >
> > Can you give me a use case for building in the manner you are
> > describing?
> >
> > sean
> >
> 
>

Mime
View raw message