While the inclusion of build.xml implies ant and the lack of detail
below */src and */test make this a bit incomplete this looks fine and
a definite improvement over the current organization.
thanks
david jencks
On Jan 3, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
I'd like to see if everone's ok with the following directory
structure,
without talking about build tools if possible. I don't think we're
anywhere
near consensus on the build tool issue at the moment, which is why
I'd like
to leave it out at the moment.
trunk/
|--build.xml
|--core/
| |--src/
| |--test/
|--web/
| |--src/
| |--test/
|--support/
| |--spring/
| | |--src/
| | |--test/
| |--ehcache/
| | |--src/
| | |--test/
I don't think anyone would disagree that this is easier to
understand than
the current fileset 'extraction' that is currently being used to
pull out
core vs web vs ehcache code. It is an improvement on the way things
are
today in any event, no matter what build tool will be used in the
future.
If that is the case, it shouldn't be a problem to institute now and
if we
need to change it later after a build tool is agreed upon (add a few
more
directories, whatever), we can do that at that time.
I'd hate to see an "all or nothing" mentality (name + directory
structure +
build tool) stagnating our project's momentum and progress...
Can we at least reach concensus on this intermediate step?
Regards,
Les
