Hello.
Before I begin, I'd like to say kudos to the IDEA team for a (mostly) great
product.
I'm working for a rather large company that has a relatively large software
department.
Until now we've been using JBuilder as our primary software development tool
and been pretty satisfied with it (except that it is way too expensive and
we're not really using many of the features that actually make it so
expensive such as EJB development).
A few of us here have been evaluating IntelliJ IDEA and we are very pleased
with it except for mainly one thing (I'll elaborate on that a little later).
We started out evaluating v2.5 but soon switched to Ariadna, mostly because
2.5 used absolute paths for many things that made group development
virtually impossible. We're running development machines on at least two
platforms (windows and linux) and we desperately needed the projects to use
relative paths for all definitions.
After we switched to Ariadna, things have gone much better. However, I
recently discovered a very serious bug that is giving us a hard time to make
the transition from JBuilder to IDEA companywide. The thing is that all
library definitions seem to be done on an "dev machine level". That is, if
I create a library definition it seems to be stored in an XML document
called "library.table.xml" that is located under the
<IDEA_HOME>/config/options directory. This means that I can not have two
versions of the project on my computer at the same time referencing
different versions of this library. This poses a serious usability issue
here for us where we are for example developing projects that have been
branched in CVS in order to maintain a "stable" branch for a release
version. The branched project does not use the same jar file version as the
project on the MAIN branch and therefore we have a big problem. This method
of storing library definitions doesn't really make much sense in this case.
Now I know that you must hate hearing that JBuilder does something better
than you but the fact is that in this case it does :o(. Overall, you guys
have a much better product except for this single, yet serious flaw. I
think that the way this is solved in JBuilder (being able to define a
library definition on three levels: Dev machine level, Project level and
User level) is a very good solution. Please tell me that this is on the
agenda... hopefully for the 3.0 release?
Kind regards, and just to prevent all misunderstanding... I'm not starting
any flame war... I'm just expressing my concern because I would like nothing
more than to drop JBuilder and pick up IDEA but the fact is that we can't
possibly do that now because of this one thing :o(
Stefan Freyr Stefansson
Software Developer, deCODE Genetics.
_______________________________________________
Eap-features mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features
