RE: [stellation-res] Source Code Consistency

["Jonathan Gossage" <jgossage@xxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mark C.
> Chu-Carroll
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 8:19 PM
> To: Stellation-res
> Subject: Re: [stellation-res] Source Code Consistency
>
>
> On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 19:30, Jonathan Gossage wrote:
> > Is the code in CVS completely up to date? I downloaded from CVS
> at 7:00PM
> > and found that the new projects org.eclipse.stellation.stim and
> > org.eclipse.stellation.task do not compile because they expect new
> > constructors in Message and Engine. It would seem that these
> classes have
> > not yet been updated.
>
> I'm working on it :-)
>
> I checked the stim and task projects in, and then starting going
> through the todo's marked in the code, and made a bundle of
> changes trying to get rid of as many of them as possible.
>
> I also renamed org.eclipse.stellation.core to
> org.eclipse.stellation.repos - for Eclipse,
> the plugin name and the basic package name really should
> be the same - and with the refactoring that we've done, separating
> out the remote and cli projects, it really is just the bare repository.
>
> I also separated out the utility classes into a util project. This
> makes it possible to compile the task and stim code independently
> of the core, which is a good thing - the less tangling, the better.
>
> Now, obviously, this many changes is kind of a big deal - and
> it's exactly what CVS is worst at, but that Stellation is good
> at.
>
> But, all of that means fixing the ant file, which I haven't
> done yet.
>
> So.. I'm working on finishing up this batch of stuff. I should
> be able to finish the ant script and testing tonight, and check
> it into Stellation tomorrow. I'll also package up a downloadable
> tar file for FTP on our server.
>
Am I right in assuming that Ant will build the client as well as the server
stuff?

Regards

Jonathan Gossage