Ok, the first pass is done with rev. 1520510
Thanks for your feedback and ideas on property files etc...: I will spend some 
time thinking about how we could further improve the layout of build files and 
still maintain flexibility in the way the system can be deployed.
I think we should be able to remove:

framework/build.xml
applications/build.xml
specialpurpose/build.xml

if we declare the filelist properties:

framework-builds
test-builds
application-builds
specialpurpose-builds

somewhere else (e.g. in a property file or in the main build.xml file).

Jacopo

On Sep 5, 2013, at 8:35 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> Adrian Crum wrote:
>> We can put Ant parameters in a properties file.
> 
> For the common and redundant ones (most are specific), yes why not? But since 
> there are not much, maybe for the clarity, simply removing the redundancy and 
> keeping common ones in build files would be enough? I hate to have to 
> open/move from 1 file to another when it's not absolutly necessary.
> 
> Jacques
> 
>> I agree we should migrate Ant targets from lower level build.xml files
>> to the main one.
>> 
>> Adrian Crum
>> Sandglass Software
>> http://www.sandglass-software.com
>> 
>> On 9/5/2013 12:00 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> in my opinion there is some mess in the Ant targets defined in the various 
>>> build.xml files of the project and I would like to
>>> discuss with you some ideas to clean them up a little bit. 
>>> Some of the issues I see:
>>> * the parameter memory.max.param is duplicated (with different values) in 
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/build.xml and OFBIZ_HOME/framework/build.xml
>>> * there are several targets (e.g. the various clean-* targets) that are 
>>> defined in OFBIZ_HOME/framework/build.xml and are also
>>> declared in OFBIZ_HOME/build.xml (the targets here just call the targets in 
>>> the framework's build.xml) 
>>> 
>>> I think that some complexity/redundancy was introduced in the attempt to 
>>> have a framework folder with an Ant build.xml file that
>>> was without dependencies; however I think that we can have a framework only 
>>> deployment even if we remove most of the targets
>>> from OFBIZ_HOME/framework/build.xml.  
>>> 
>>> The layout of a framework only deployment could be:
>>> 
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/build.xml (the targets to manage the runtime files etc... are 
>>> defined here)
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/macro.xml
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/runtime/*
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/framework/component-load.xml
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/framework/build.xml (with minimal set of targets; we could 
>>> probably get rid of this build.xml file completely, if we
>>> move the filelist "framework-builds" to OFBIZ_HOME/build.xml) 
>>> OFBIZ_HOME/framework/* (components: each with its own build.xml file, as it 
>>> is now)
>>> 
>>> What do you think?
>>> 
>>> Jacopo

Reply via email to