Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-dev] Expanding 'standards' for build files.

I prefer Eric's proposal for <name>.jar, <name>.lib and <name>.dir

Edwin Tang wrote:
Hi Eric,

This is great initiative.

Probably, instead of <name>.jar, <name>.lib and <name>.path, it could better that we have
<name>.dir: the location of a jar file
<name>.lib: a jar file name
<name>.path: a path element defined by <pathelement path="${<name>.dir}/${<name>.lib}"/>

The benifits of this option are:
1. Users have full flexibility to able to customize <name>.dir, <name>.lib, or both for every single jar file
2. Avoid the difficulty to choose a sound property name - <name>.jar or <name>.jarfile
3. Be consistent with the TopLink test/build naming conventions


-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Gwin Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 8:06 AM
To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
Subject: [eclipselink-dev] Expanding 'standards' for build files.


I'm sending this out as a notification/proposal of some additional standard conventions I plan on adding to our build files after the branch.
     - properties ending in .jar define jarfile names only (no path)
- properties ending in .lib are fully qualified jars (path and filename)
     - properties ending in .dir are directory paths
     - properties ending in .path are path refid names (classpath fragments)
- targets beginning with test- are reserved for high level test targets,
       and are used in test results parsing
- targets typically use the form <action>-<object>-<type> (ie. package-bundle-zip)

Some are clarifications of standards already in place, but not well publicized. However, with regard to .jar/.lib and .dir/.path there is no current standard, and properties are named and used in a fairly random mostly interchangeable way. There are many reasons this is becoming an issue now, but here are the biggest: - bugs requesting the use of minimal classpaths necessitate the need to individually define libraries. However, the build has multiple entry points so paths to those libraries are relative to the entry point. So the need to separate path from jar name. - adding individual libraries (rather than eclipselink.core.depend or which list them all) also creates a need to separately define directories and classpath subsets.

For the most part I've tried to keep the usage most prevalent for each postfix -.lib was mostly used to define full paths to jars, while .jar mostly defined jar names. However, there are also a few non-conformant properties ( and .jarfile) -.dir really hasn't changed at all, but there were a few uses where it was a defining a pathref
 -.path is pretty much new old pathrefs were either .dir or .classpath

While I needed to implement these changes for the oracle modules for critical fixes in 2.0.0, I plan on implementing these changes across the board after the branch and discussion has occurred.

Does anyone object to these standards, or have preferences other than what I plan to implement? I can see .jarfile being used as the standard postfix because the property can't easily be confused with a static usage of a jar, but it wasn't routinely used.

Comments? (If I hear nothing from you I will assume it is assent, and continue as outlined after the branch is complete.)

eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev mailing list

Back to the top