Home » Language IDEs » ServerTools (WTP) » Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested
| Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #118555] |
Fri, 08 July 2005 11:52  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are
projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please
address that following questions:
1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
contain a single module.
2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming
of directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the
runtime directory layout?
Thx.
-- Arthur Ryman
|
|
|
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #118565 is a reply to message #118555] |
Fri, 08 July 2005 12:18  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: usenet.bofh.nildram.co.uk
Hi Arthur,
Personally, all the J2EE projects I have ever worked on have contained all
the modules in one project. The view taken here is that a project = a
system, and the system is not much use without all the modules.
Given this, I think it's important as a user to be in full control of where
the various artefacts are stored within my project.
I have yet to use WTP (I am waiting for the release), but projects I work on
are typically laid out as follows:
....\.project, .classpath, build.xml, etc.
....\src\java - All Java source including bean interfaces and
implementations
....\src\java\META-INF - ejb.xml, server specific descriptors, etc.
....\src\web - All Web sources - JSPs, HTML, images, etc.
....\src\web\META-INF - web descriptors
....\lib - 3rd party libs - Hibernate, Struts, etc.
....\etc - Various odds and sods, including application.xml, etc.
So for me, it is important to be able to construct various JARs (EJB,
utilities, etc.) and WARs from various places in the source tree. The EAR is
then created from these JARs, WARs, third-party JARs, and descriptors pulled
from \etc
Rgds,
Dan.
"Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are projects
> that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be re-examining this
> design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please address that
> following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
> classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
> contain a single module.
>
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming of
> directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the runtime
> directory layout?
>
> Thx.
>
> -- Arthur Ryman
|
|
| |
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #118749 is a reply to message #118555] |
Fri, 08 July 2005 18:19 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: florin.iucha.ugs.com
Arthur Ryman wrote:
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of
> one classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects
> so they contain a single module.
In my experience, we tend to have web applications that aggregate
multiple projects. They can be plain java projects that produce a
single jar file, or more often "slices of war files":
- M1
- M2
- M3
- S1
- S2
M1, M2, M3 are modules shared among the S1 and S2 solutions. S1 depends
on M1 and M2 while S2 depends on M1 and M3. This means, the deployed
image for S1 has to contain the classes from the M1 and M2 and all the
artifacts from their web/WEB-INF/META-INF, plus the external jars they
reference.
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and
> naming of directories within a module, or should the structure
> parallel the runtime directory layout?
This will be useful, at least in helping people transition existing
projects without unecessary pain and without getting tons of buy-in
from everybody else on the project. web/WebContent/my-jsps/whatever -
they all should work.
florin
|
|
| |
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #119079 is a reply to message #118555] |
Sun, 10 July 2005 19:33 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I personally like the one project, one module approach. While it means more
projects, it also more easily allows reuse of modules between projects. But
I think, if at all possible, you need to support both, since there seem to
be a lot of people who like the one project, all modules approach.
As far as the structure, I like having the structure parallel the runtime
layout. It just seems more logical to me.
Doug Olender
"Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are projects
> that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be re-examining this
> design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please address that
> following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
> classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
> contain a single module.
>
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming of
> directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the runtime
> directory layout?
>
> Thx.
>
> -- Arthur Ryman
|
|
|
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #119195 is a reply to message #118555] |
Mon, 11 July 2005 04:07 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: Rafal.Krzewski.caltha.pl
Arthur Ryman wrote:
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are
> projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
> re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please
> address that following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
> classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
> contain a single module.
IMO no. 1 module per 1 project is good. 1 classpath per project is
definetely good too - helps keeping things sane.
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming
> of directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the
> runtime directory layout?
Yes.
- provide a menaningful UI for editing deployable module layout.
- allow full range of input locations (same project, other workspace
project, classpath variable, classpath container)
- allowing input from classpath variables is *critical* to Maven users.
- give an option to grab an archive and uncompress in into desired
output path. This allows composing a war from a number of smaller
archives (presumably resource jars, because "war must have a web.xml"
constraint seems sensible).
- give an option to disable target archive compression, for performance
reasons.
- did I mention input from classpath variables?
My idea for the UI of the top of my head would be a table with the
following column
1st column : input source type (project, variable, container)
2nd column : input source id
3rd column : input path (path within project / classpath container,
variable extension)
4th column : output path (withn deployable module)
5th column : uncopress flag (disabled, unless source item selected by
columns 1-3 is a zip archive)
Additionally the dialog should allow chosing the location of the
manifest (META-INF/manifest.mf) file (it's reasonable to restrict it's
location to the project that contains the deployable module), and a flag
for enabling/disabling archive file compression.
I can put the above in Bugzilla, if you find it sensible.
Rafał
|
|
|
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #119375 is a reply to message #118555] |
Mon, 11 July 2005 12:05 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jeff.duska_removethis.noaa.gov
Arthur Ryman wrote:
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are
> projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
> re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please
> address that following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
> classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
> contain a single module.
>
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming
> of directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the
> runtime directory layout?
>
> Thx.
>
> -- Arthur Ryman
Arthur:
I've been using the Flexible Projects in WTP since it was released. Here
are my thoughts.
1. There *must* be easier way for user to migrate existing projects into
this. Today, I only know of editing the .wtpmodule, .project, .runtime,
..j2ee and .classpath. This very error prone. The only docs I've seen
show how to do a new project.
2. Developer will need at bare minimum to have way to replace JavaSource
and WebContent with their own setup.
3. I only need on module at a time, but I can see the value and need for
more.
4. My biggest concern is this too difficult and convoluted to explain to
users. If I want to have flexible project, I have to turn it on in the
preferences. If I do that then all my wizard become more complex for no
reason. Compare this with Intellij 4.5. When I create new project it
asks me do I need multi-module project. It just that simple. I can
change my mind by looking at the project settings. I can also important
another project into this project as a module. The current design in WTP
seems to very rigid I'm either using flexible project all the time or
not. I think this is just UI.
5. Setting are scattered everywhere. I've yet to find where I can change
my Web Content my settings in a dialog. If you look at Intellij, more
of it is located in one tab page. In Eclipse, I've got to look at server
page, Java JAR dependencies page, which doesn't appear to work and then
Web Module page. I want all this one page.
HTH,
Jeff Duska
|
|
|
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #120995 is a reply to message #118555] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 04:51 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
If the restriction of one module per project remains, then the terms
"Flexible Projects" and even "module" are confusing. If this restriction
stays in place, then the purpose of the .wtpmodules file is roughly
similar to a .classpath file - an ancillary component to a project
(there certainly isn't any concept of modularization).
What users want to be able to do are solve a number of problems:
1. Be given a wizards and folder layouts so that they can author
different types of web services.
2. Associate builders, publishers and server instances with these.
3. Share code between these web services
- common libraries.
- dependent libraries, where one web-service depends
on code from another.
- common resources (Schemas, WSDL, etc.
- dependent resources, where one web-service uses
resources (schemas defined by another).
4. Provide an editor for this information (i.e. .wtpmodules editor).
If you are going to have multiple modules per project, then publishing
items should be referred to by the "project/module" pair.
If you have only one module per project, then drop the visibility of the
module concept and present users only with projects. Modules should no
longer have names (since the project name is enough).
Fergal.
Arthur Ryman wrote:
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are
> projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
> re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please
> address that following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT restriction of one
> classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they
> contain a single module.
>
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming
> of directories within a module, or should the structure parallel the
> runtime directory layout?
>
> Thx.
>
> -- Arthur Ryman
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #146633 is a reply to message #118555] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 19:12 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: mikeNOwSPAMse.hotmail.com
Although late, I'll take this great opportunity to share my views on the
Eclipse/WTP projects. My comments mainly concern question #2 about
flexibility in the directory structure.
Flexible projects and multiple source directories
-------------------------------------------------
My answer is a loud "yes, flexibility is needed" :-).
When I first started using Eclipse I immediately started loving the easy
way of pointing out different Java Source directories in the Java Build
Path. I was actually surprised that WTP hadn't followed the same concept,
f ex offering something like a Webapp Source directory list in a Webapp
Build Path configuration.
In real-world projects I think you often end up with having your source
code under several different roots, and this applies to your static web
files just like it does for java files, be it for component version control
reasons or whatever reason.
One reason to do this is when you organize your static files into multiple
root directories to be able to build different variants of the product by
simply merging the file trees from a subset of these roots into a result
directory. Or if you want to build a suite of products sharing a common
subset of files.
The problem is that this often breaks JSP and XML code-assist as these
editors are not aware that they should look in several roots for WEB-INF
files like taglib defs and such.
Being able to specify multiple source directories within the project, so
they are used (among other things) as roots for validation and content-
assist, would be a highly desired feature.
If implementing this, it is of course also desired to merge the file trees
from these directories into the result structure (.deployables).
Theoretical thinking about multiple output directories
------------------------------------------------------
This is really only half-way thought through, but continuing on the
scenario above where I have a project that can build several different
configurations/variants with slightly different static content, the idea of
multiple output directories came to mind (to use for building different
variants to different output directories within the project).
It could also be used for modules using static files from a common code
directory, so by f ex specifying:
common/src/jsp -> output: /module1/WebRoot and /module2/WebRoot
we could have the IDE help us with synchronizing this code sharing.
But then again, this starts looking a bit like the dependencies between
projects on the Java Build Path and maybe is handled better on the project
level (but JSP and XML content-assist might be harder to have functional
across projects?).
Cheers
Mike
"Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
> re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please address that following questions:
>
> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT
> restriction of one classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they contain a single module.
>
> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming of directories within a module, or should the structure
> parallel the runtime directory layout?
>
> Thx.
>
> -- Arthur Ryman
|
|
| |
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #146950 is a reply to message #146633] |
Mon, 14 November 2005 11:39 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Mike Wilson wrote:
> Although late, I'll take this great opportunity to share my views on the
> Eclipse/WTP projects. My comments mainly concern question #2 about
> flexibility in the directory structure.
>
> Flexible projects and multiple source directories
> -------------------------------------------------
> My answer is a loud "yes, flexibility is needed" :-).
> When I first started using Eclipse I immediately started loving the easy
> way of pointing out different Java Source directories in the Java Build
> Path. I was actually surprised that WTP hadn't followed the same concept,
> f ex offering something like a Webapp Source directory list in a Webapp
> Build Path configuration.
>
> In real-world projects I think you often end up with having your source
> code under several different roots, and this applies to your static web
> files just like it does for java files, be it for component version control
> reasons or whatever reason.
>
> One reason to do this is when you organize your static files into multiple
> root directories to be able to build different variants of the product by
> simply merging the file trees from a subset of these roots into a result
> directory. Or if you want to build a suite of products sharing a common
> subset of files.
>
> The problem is that this often breaks JSP and XML code-assist as these
> editors are not aware that they should look in several roots for WEB-INF
> files like taglib defs and such.
>
> Being able to specify multiple source directories within the project, so
> they are used (among other things) as roots for validation and content-
> assist, would be a highly desired feature.
> If implementing this, it is of course also desired to merge the file trees
> from these directories into the result structure (.deployables).
>
> Theoretical thinking about multiple output directories
> ------------------------------------------------------
> This is really only half-way thought through, but continuing on the
> scenario above where I have a project that can build several different
> configurations/variants with slightly different static content, the idea of
> multiple output directories came to mind (to use for building different
> variants to different output directories within the project).
>
> It could also be used for modules using static files from a common code
> directory, so by f ex specifying:
> common/src/jsp -> output: /module1/WebRoot and /module2/WebRoot
> we could have the IDE help us with synchronizing this code sharing.
>
> But then again, this starts looking a bit like the dependencies between
> projects on the Java Build Path and maybe is handled better on the project
> level (but JSP and XML content-assist might be harder to have functional
> across projects?).
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
>
>>WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
>>re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please address that following questions:
>>
>>1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT
>>restriction of one classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they contain a single module.
>>
>>2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming of directories within a module, or should the structure
>>parallel the runtime directory layout?
>>
>>Thx.
>>
>>-- Arthur Ryman
>
>
>
Mike,
Thx for the belated response. We made the decision to drop support for
multiple modules per project (#1) and pursue flexible directory layout
within a project (#2). The design approach is to allow multiple Web
source folders analogously to multiple Java source folders.
-- Arthur
|
|
|
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #146958 is a reply to message #146769] |
Mon, 14 November 2005 11:43 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
John Kenny wrote:
>
>> "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
>
> news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
>
>>> WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are
>>> projects
>
> that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
>
>>> re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please
>
> address that following questions:
>
>>>
>>> 1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one
>
> Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT
>
>>> restriction of one classpath per project. The alternate design is to
>>> limit
>
> Projects so they contain a single module.
>
>>>
>>> 2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and
>>> naming of
>
> directories within a module, or should the structure
>
>>> parallel the runtime directory layout?
>>>
>>> Thx.
>>>
>>> -- Arthur Ryman
>
>
> Answer to question #1
> Yes it is useful. The projects at my company typically consist of one
> Ear that contains two Wars and some common java packages shared by both
> Wars in a single Jar. The jar and wars are specific to the particular
> customer engagement and are never shared with other Ears. It would be
> better if I could create one project folder for the ear, and within that
> project have the two wars - that way in CVS I don't need three separate
> projects to archive this 1 customer engagement. That is not to say the
> customer Ear may need other "reusable" wars but those belong in projects
> outside of the Ear.
>
> Answer to question #2
> No it is harmful. My experience teaching other developers web
> technologies has shown that people have a hard time conceptually
> understanding what they are dealing with in terms of EJB's, war, jars
> and ears. But when I explain it to them in terms of a file system
> (which all developers have a good handle on) they have a much easier
> time picking it up. I think adding the ability to have things spread
> around logically just further confuses an already confusing subject.
>
> John Kenny
>
John,
Unfortunately, we have dropped support for #1 since the current JDT
limits us to one classpath per project and we could therefore not
isolate the J2EE modules from each other within a project. We elected to
support #2 which is not what you want - sorry. We did spend a lot of
time analyzing this design and did not make the decision lightly.
-- Arthur
|
|
| | |
| Re: Flexible Projects - User Feedback Requested [message #147270 is a reply to message #146633] |
Wed, 16 November 2005 09:23 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thisisnot.mymail.com
I would like to see some interoperability with the maven 2 project. In
particular they seem to prefer a project that doesn't generate artifacts
and then inside (within that folder) other projects that generate the
various modules (ejb, web, ear) and inherit some stuff from the parent
project. However this is problematic with the way eclipse manages
projects (flat only) is that right?
Mike Wilson wrote:
> Although late, I'll take this great opportunity to share my views on the
> Eclipse/WTP projects. My comments mainly concern question #2 about
> flexibility in the directory structure.
>
> Flexible projects and multiple source directories
> -------------------------------------------------
> My answer is a loud "yes, flexibility is needed" :-).
> When I first started using Eclipse I immediately started loving the easy
> way of pointing out different Java Source directories in the Java Build
> Path. I was actually surprised that WTP hadn't followed the same concept,
> f ex offering something like a Webapp Source directory list in a Webapp
> Build Path configuration.
>
> In real-world projects I think you often end up with having your source
> code under several different roots, and this applies to your static web
> files just like it does for java files, be it for component version control
> reasons or whatever reason.
>
> One reason to do this is when you organize your static files into multiple
> root directories to be able to build different variants of the product by
> simply merging the file trees from a subset of these roots into a result
> directory. Or if you want to build a suite of products sharing a common
> subset of files.
>
> The problem is that this often breaks JSP and XML code-assist as these
> editors are not aware that they should look in several roots for WEB-INF
> files like taglib defs and such.
>
> Being able to specify multiple source directories within the project, so
> they are used (among other things) as roots for validation and content-
> assist, would be a highly desired feature.
> If implementing this, it is of course also desired to merge the file trees
> from these directories into the result structure (.deployables).
>
> Theoretical thinking about multiple output directories
> ------------------------------------------------------
> This is really only half-way thought through, but continuing on the
> scenario above where I have a project that can build several different
> configurations/variants with slightly different static content, the idea of
> multiple output directories came to mind (to use for building different
> variants to different output directories within the project).
>
> It could also be used for modules using static files from a common code
> directory, so by f ex specifying:
> common/src/jsp -> output: /module1/WebRoot and /module2/WebRoot
> we could have the IDE help us with synchronizing this code sharing.
>
> But then again, this starts looking a bit like the dependencies between
> projects on the Java Build Path and maybe is handled better on the project
> level (but JSP and XML content-assist might be harder to have functional
> across projects?).
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message news:dam7gf$ta$1@news.eclipse.org...
>
>>WTP 0.7 contains initial support for Flexible Projects, which are projects that let you develop several J2EE modules. We will be
>>re-examining this design in WTP 1.0 and we'd like you feedback. Please address that following questions:
>>
>>1. Is it useful to have several J2EE modules (Web, EJB, etc. )in one Eclipse Project? We have to live with the current JDT
>>restriction of one classpath per project. The alternate design is to limit Projects so they contain a single module.
>>
>>2. Is it useful to allow a lot a flexibility in the location and naming of directories within a module, or should the structure
>>parallel the runtime directory layout?
>>
>>Thx.
>>
>>-- Arthur Ryman
>
>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 07 10:43:27 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.37109 seconds |
Home