Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[eclipselink-dev] A question about how you use the test projects...


In preparation for merging the initial Tycho changes to the build system I am implementing the fix for

I have some questions about how far I should proceed with this. Basically, there is an issue deploying our PDE bundles within the IDE because Eclipse expects to generate it's own build.xml to do the deployment, but one already exists, so deployment fails. The workaround is to temporarily delete the build .xml.

The permanent fix is to rename our build.xml files to something else... we opted for "antbuild.xml" a while ago, but haven't yet implemented it in production. The plan was to rename all build.xml and files to antbuild.xml and respectively for consistency. However there are other considerations, and I want to make sure we are all agreed on the scope before I make the change.

Other considerations are as follows:
- if the default "build.xml" is not used the ant commandline for the default target of a given project would become "ant -f antbuild.xml"
  instead of "ant"
   - this shouldn't be a big deal for just the OSGi projects because they are usually called from the root build or built in PDE, but may have
     a profound impact upon day-to-day testing.
- The standard ant files (build.xml and .properties) are redundant for command-line Maven/Tycho and a standard PDE file
  is expected for Tycho use, so all  OSGi product bundle projects are effected.

Therefore, a sweeping rename in no longer necessary (in trunk) for OSGi bundles (Tycho will remove them entirely), and other projects would be impacted by command-line changes if we proceed, and there would only be a benefit for OSGi projects (testing).

My questions to you are as follows:
1. Do you think it would be less confusing for you and others to standardize all command-line ant filenames to "antbuild"?
2. Would such a sweeping rename directly impact your day-to-day work?
2a. If so, since it really isn't a necessity on Trunk, do you believe the fix is justified on older branches?



Back to the top