Adam Heath wrote: > David E Jones wrote: >> Why are we even having this discussion? It seems like the original >> change was trying to fix stuff that isn't broken... and now we're going >> on and on about it, even though it wasn't broken in the first place. > > Did you miss my reason as to why I did this? I was in framework/base, > running ant directly in that directory, then in another terminal was > running startofbiz.sh. > > This problem is exactly the same as the standard make issue, where you > need to run make at the top-level no matter what. It's a pain in the > ass(hint: search for nested-make considered harmful) > >> If anyone wants to discuss it further, I recommend writing things in the >> form of: >> >> 1. this is the problem and why >> 2. this is what we should do about it >> >> Without a problem to attack it seems like we're just running in circles. >> That it's not fun, but some of us have other things we'd rather be >> doing. ;) > > 1: Running ant in framework/base, to compile src/start, does not update > ofbiz in $ofbiz.home. > 2: move framework/base/src/start to $ofbiz.home/src, so that one > 'component' doesn't actually really contain two.
ps: I will back this change out, as soon as I finish getting framework/base uptodate with generics; almost done with that.
