On 14-01-11 12:53, Peter Firmstone wrote:
It cannot discern between binary and compile time compatibility, which
is a problem for monolithic builds. Ever develop with build cycles, that
only compile some classes, only to find later when you clean then build,
it is broken? I have.
Yes. I have as well on many occasions. And what was the cause every
time? Wrong dependency specifications.
I'm going to refrain from getting drawn into arguments that can't be won
without a demonstrable example for now, we can discuss the advantages
later when the modular build is more mature. Otherwise we're comparing
something that is mature against something that doesn't yet exist.
I'm sorry to hear that you won't discuss this further.
But the matter is not is something is just better then the other. A race
will not prove anything here. We are not starting from scratch here.
Even if your new solution will decrease the building time, thats not a
garantee i wont vote "-1; keep the current build".
If you want to reorganize the source tree, fine, we can talk about it.
You can experiment with multiple tools, and propose another directory
structure. So in a later stage we can use other build tools if we cannot
iron out the bugs in the ant build.
Gr. Sim
P.S.: what i would do in your place, was to build a conversion script
that pulls the trunk, reorganises the directory structure, and test my
build environment. Until it finally works as good as the other and then
start to move the files in svn (after a vote offcourse).
You can also code it, so that in the end you swap out your move commands
for svn moves.
--
QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
