Dear committer, There was an interest on the list to have an incremental federated build rather than the build from scratch. Let me remind you that the patch [1] solves this problem with an exception to class library natives, so it has a reason to be committed. Another reason is that it proved to be useful for me: I have just applied this patch to the fourth workspace instead of waiting for the whole recompilation.
Thank you in advance. [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5521 On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexey > You are correct about incremental build issue of the federated build. > > The fix of the issue is not very difficult: see HARMONY-5521 for the > patch. BTW, the build file with Nathan's unified hyphens looks much > more readable. Thanks, Nathan! > > [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5521 > > > > > On Feb 17, 2008 1:24 PM, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Current federated build is not suited for every day work. Because it > > makes only clean builds and this takes lots of time. > > > > So we should keep possibility to build class library, vm and selected > > class library module alone. > > > > SY, Alexey > > > > 2008/2/17, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Nathan, all, > > > Copying class library artifacts to the working_vm/ directory is a > > > legacy of two component system, isn't it? Now, when we have several > > > (three, and will have more) upper level components, it looks > > > reasonable to collect the build artifacts at the same upper level. Why > > > should not we assemble the build in the target/ dir? May be one should > > > add several target directories for different build configurations. I > > > believe that the artifact location should not affect class library > > > development, we just need to move deploy directories to a common > > > place. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2008 11:58 PM, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I was thinking that we could use a utility target in the top-level > > > > build script that copied the HDK artifacts from the working_vm to the > > > > working_classlib, but I'm still catching up with the new DRLVM build. > > > > Would copying the 'working_vm/deploy' to the 'working_classlib/deploy' > > > > be sufficient? > > > > > > > > The use for this would be to facilitate class library development, so > > > > I want to be able to run the top-level build, copy the HDK artifacts, > > > > then move into 'working_classlib' and be able to do cleans, rebuilds > > > > and tests. > > > > > > > > -Nathan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > With best regards, > > > Alexei > > > > > > > > > -- > With best regards, > Alexei > -- With best regards, Alexei
