2012/6/25 Andre Fischer <a...@a-w-f.de>: > On 25.06.2012 10:46, Zhe Liu wrote: >> >> 2012/6/25 Andre Fischer <a...@a-w-f.de>: >>> >>> On 25.06.2012 10:00, Zhe Liu wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/6/25 Andre Fischer <a...@a-w-f.de>: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Zhe Liu, >>>>> >>>>> we already have four test related modules under main/ (test, >>>>> testautomation, >>>>> testgraphical, testtools). >>>>> >>>>> Would one of these be a good place to add two sub-directories for the >>>>> new >>>>> testing code? >>>> >>>> >>>> Are you concerned about too many modules? >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> The new 2 modules are top level modules. qadevoo and testoo depend >>>> on testcommon. >>>> qadevoo->testcommon >>>> testoo -> testcommon >>>> If >>>> qadevoo->test/testcommon >>>> test/testoo ->test/testcommon >>>> I don't know if it works according to the current build system. In >>>> addition, I don't want to overwrite the existing code. They are >>>> totally different. The 4 modules is maintained by nobody and can be >>>> removed in future, I said it in >>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Test_Refactor >>> >>> >>> >>> I see. The goal is to remove the modules test, testautomation, >>> testgraphical, testtools? Then it is OK to ignore them for now. >>> >>> But then my question is: why not one new module and place testcommon and >>> testoo as subdirectories into it? >> >> Do you mean the code structure like the following? >> test/testcommon >> test/testoo >> Jürgen suggested the same code layout. Actually I also prefer to it. I >> have one question. test/testoo depends on "test/testcommon". >> cd test/testoo >> build >> Is testcommon built automatically? If yes, it's ok. > > > We have main/test/prj/build.lst for that. There is one line for each > directory that is to be build, together with dependencies on other modules > (in the first line) and on other directories in the same module (on each > line after the '-') > > You would probably add two lines similar to these: > > te test\source\testcommon nmake - all te_testcommon NULL > te test\source\testoo nmake - all te_testoo te_testcommon NULL > > Which state that te_testoo depends on te_testcommon. > Then build the module with > > cd main/test > build > > (please note that you build in main/test/, not in main/test/testoo or > main/test/testcommon) > > -Andre > > OK. I accept. Thanks for your advice, Andre. De Bin, what's your opinion? >> >>> >>> Besides, has the naming scheme (test{common/oo}) anything to do with the >>> now >>> obsolete distinction between oo and so (the Sun only code parts)? >> >> No! Do you have better name? >> >>> >>> -Andre >> >> >> >> >
-- Best Regards >From aliu...@gmail.com
