Hi Rhett, I'm interested in the your IDEA changes. I have made a few changes myself to the idea task not to the idea7 task, mostly relating to JDK version.
Could you put it on github, so I can pull from you? Anders On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Rhett Sutphin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > IDEA project file creation is indeed a slippery thing. I use heavily > modified version of idea7x myself (on IDEA 8) and have avoided upgrading to > IDEA 9 partially because I don't want to deal with updating that task to > work with 9 (if any are needed -- I haven't actually tried). > > That said, I have been meaning to re-package my custom task as a gem. It > seems to me that this is a better way to deal with IDEA support since none > of the committers (AFAIK) use it. I agree that a base abstraction with > output that would work with both 8 and 9 (at least) would be nice. Here are > the features I have in my custom task (which is called iidea) over idea7x: > > 1) Detects VCS automatically (subversion and git only) with manual override > 2) Automatically excludes all target and report directories from indexing > 3) Supports manual configuration of source and test paths for each module > 4) Supports low-level configuration of particular IML sections (by building > XML directly in the buildr project definition) > 5) Provides a "clean" task > 6) Includes all buildr subprojects (not just ones that are packaged) but > allows particular subprojects to be skipped using a project attribute > > All of those except for (4) should be possible using a base abstraction. > I'll see what I can come up with, though it will be a couple of weeks > before I can really look at it. > > FWIW, IDEA 8 still supports the file-based approach. (It's what I'm using > with 8.1.4.) I don't believe in committing IDE project files (or anything > else which is generatable) to VCS, so it works fine for me and my team. All > the patches Alex brought up are minor changes to the existing idea7x code, > so they use the file-based approach. > > Alex, BUILDR-367 and BUILDR-376 are both genuine issues which I've fixed in > my task. BUILDR-377 uses a feature of IDEA I'm not familiar with but which > sounds useful. I haven't reviewed any of the patches, though. > > Rhett > > On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Shane Witbeck wrote: > >> A few things to consider: >> >> >> 1. I think we need to define which versions of IDEA these patches should >> work with. The last idea7x patch which I wrote was specifically for IDEA >> 7x. >> It seems each subsequent version of IDEA (8x and 9x) has had changes to >> the >> way they handle project and module files. >> 2. Version 8x of IDEA introduced a new way of defining project and module >> files. It's called the "directory-based" approach. I believe the new >> approach was to make it easier to share project files among team members >> by >> checking into a source repository. The older project files apparently >> were >> hard to keep in sync because of merge conflicts, etc. Do these patches >> address the traditional project files or the new directory-based >> approach? >> 3. Having gone through the process of trying to keep changes in Buildr >> and IDEA project files in synch along with changing formats with each new >> IDEA version, I finally gave up. I propose a more clearly defined >> approach >> which addresses differences between IDEA project file version formats. >> Perhaps a departure from idea vs idea7x tasks and have one idea task with >> a >> param indicating which version to generate the project files for? >> >> That all being said, I'm willing to help in this effort. >> >> -Shane >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Alex Boisvert >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Alex Boisvert <[email protected] >>>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> Any committer wants to step in and review these patches? >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-376 >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-377 >>>> >>>> I don't use IDEA and I'm not familiar with their project descriptions. >>>> >>> >>> While we're at it there's also this one to be reviewed, >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-369 >>> >>> In lieu of specs (which are sadly missing for IDEA), I could be consoled >>> if >>> fellow IDEA contributors cross-reviewed their patches. i.e., Alexis >>> reviewing BUILDR-376/377 and Peter reviewing BUILDR-369, or anybody >>> else... >>> >>> Just indicate so on the issue itself to help expedite the process. >>> >>> thanks! >>> alex >>> > > -- http://anders.janmyr.com/
