On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 06:01:55AM -0500, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:53:18AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > Also, I don't see the point of checking in compiled javadocs, and > > especially binary class files, into cvs. CVS is lousy as a FTP system - > > there are much better ways to make builds available. > > I assume he just meant those would be the directory names created > by the make builds.
Make the build scripts make whatever directories they want, but leave cvs alone in that case. > > > That looks reasonable. I'd rather you named the build dir "build" > > > instead of "classes", it is fairly standard. > > > > One java tree, one java tree, one java tree. > > Why? Mixing the .class files with the source files just gets in the > way.. I like rm -r build/Freenet/ If for no other reason, then because by default the compilers dump the class files where the java files are, so one is doomed to a headache of old class files lying among the source code from absent minded test compiles. alias rmbuild="find -name \*.class -print0 | xargs -0 rm -rf" <> -- Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
