On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 20:26, Henri Yandell wrote: > On 10/9/05, Anil Gangolli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It would have helped on the "all" target bit, and also on finding the build > > results, but you're right that we could and probably shoul dmake "all" the > > default target and the result location easier to guess without even reading > > (like maybe a dist dir at top level as an end result?). > > If we put it in the form of a distribution, as gets released etc, then > dist/ would be a great name. If it's just a roller/ dir, then dist > would be confusing as it so often expects to have a tar.gz, .zip or > something.
I think the build process works fine the way it is, but I also wouldn't mind seeing us have a more standardized build setup. We are pretty close, but I think it's probably best if we just pick one of the standards and comform to it as entirely as possible. I'm leaning more towards the Java Blueprints strategy for webapps, but the Jakarta layout is fine as well. http://java.sun.com/blueprints/code/projectconventions.html#99632 http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.0-doc/appdev/source.html I also think the other goal we still need to keep in sight is to be able to actually package and deploy as a .war file. We don't write to the webapp context anymore, but we do read a number of files/directories, so I'm not sure if we could do this yet. -- Allen > > Hen
