On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 11:26, Vincent Massol wrote: > At least we have an agreement on adding a <type> element. That's a good > first step! :-) > > Hmm... If I understand correctly what you are saying about deliverables, > there should be one project.xml for each deliverable. That means that > all of these project.xml (for each deliverable) could/should actually > live in the same directory location (as they are operating on the same > sources for most of them). > > project-jar.xml > project-javadoc.xml > project-src.xml > > Is that what you mean?
I'm not sure how to categorize it is really the difficult part for me. Primarily I am building a JAR which I consider the primary artifact but of course you have the supporting artifacts like docs and such. > But then, isn't this the same as saying > > <project> > <deliverable>jar</deliverable> > <deliverable>jar</deliverable> > <deliverable>jar</deliverable> > </project> > > or > > <solution> > <deliverable>project-jar.xml</deliverable> > <deliverable>project-javadoc.xml</deliverable> > <deliverable>project-src.xml</deliverable> > </solution> if you prefer. > > That said I find this a bit heavy to write as all project-*.xml will > share 99% of their content. So in practice you'll need: > > project-common.xml (extending some higher level project-common.xml) > project-jar.xml (extending project-common.xml) > project-javadoc.xml "" > project-src.xml "" > > I definitely think this is too heavy. Yah I agree. I certainly wouldn't want to get into that. It's highly inconvenient and irritating. > We already have 2 levels: a global project is made of several > subprojects. What you are saying (if I understood correctly, probably > not ;-)) is that subproject is made of several "deliverable projects". Basically, yes. But I certainly don't want to get into a POM orgy in order to make a JAR along with some docs and the distribution. But there is a distinct difference between say the JAR and a javadocs bundle simple for the fact that one can exist without the other but not vice versa. I don't know maybe a distinction between the primary artifact and support artifacts. I would just like to avoid the complete arbitrary nature of the gump descriptor when it comes things that are generated from a project. > Hmmm.... > > -- > jvz. > > Jason van Zyl > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://tambora.zenplex.org > > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational > and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. > > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
