On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:36, Paul Hammant wrote: > OK, given that we all know about what we are doing (with the amazingly > complicated build scripts), but one of the critisisms of all newbies is > that they don't understand what it's all about, then perhaps we are a > little guilty of "can't see the woods for the trees" pattern. We should > incramentally start to make our build files more obvious. Use > description="" , comment, modularise etc. +1 definetly > Given that logkit can be build without a number of optional jars, > perhaps we should warn of the missing status, so that the keen newbie > builder can feel they are affecting a process by downloading jars and > re-running build.bat/sh. > > The diff below (tested) warns to the console of missing classes pior to > javac. Looks good .. if I was to poke you to CVS again - could you suffer the agony or should I add it myself ? ;) > Perhaps we should go one stage further and make a target that will get > jars from jakarta-apache.org (or elsewhere). That target is not > automatically run (we can't assume all builders are permanently wired to > the web), but merely hinted at in the warnings stared by this patch. > Actually some blend of relative retrieval (framwork) and download would > do trick. +1000000000000000 Long term goal and hopefully something jjan will accomplish .... not sure if it still operational though. > Thoughts? I can do the coding (master of depends/unless/if). quick ! quick ! a victim ... errr ... volunteer ... yes, a volunteer. -- Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* * "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, * * and proving that there is no need to do so - almost * * everyone gets busy on the proof." * * - John Kenneth Galbraith * *-----------------------------------------------------* --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
