OK, patch take 2 coming up.

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:22 PM, Drew Farris wrote:
>
>> +1 for not checking in generated sources. Maven is more than capable of
>> handling the process in a way that is transparent to the end user, and this
>> is the established convention for maven builds.
>
> Why don't we start with this and if it proves problematic, we can check in 
> the gen. sources?  As long as Maven automates it, that should be fine.
>
>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2009 9:10 PM, "Benson Margulies" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Let me describe the scenario I start with, just in case by some chance
>> you all decide that it's not too bad.
>>
>> There's a maven plugin that reads templates and writes sources.
>>
>> We configure it to write them to target/generated-sources/...
>>
>> The plugin automatically adds that directory to the compilation.
>>
>> So, whenever you type maven, the sources are generated and compiled.
>> So you have the sources from typing maven, and you don't have to worry
>> about checking them in after changing a template, and you don't have
>> to worry about someone changing a generated source and not changing
>> the underlying template.
>>
>> If this doesn't persuade, here's plan b.
>>
>> the output of the generator goes into src/main/java, but the generator
>> is only put into operation with -Pregenerate, so that those
>> unconcerned with these templates don't see a lot of M's on these
>> files. You might say, 'what M's? the new version will be textually
>> identical, and svn is smarter than that.' If that's the consensus
>> view, I'll just run it that way.
>
>

Reply via email to