Directory layout (was Re: [JBoss-dev] JBOSS and SQL Server 2000)
--- Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I agree about the eclipse discussion, but it does actually have a point for development of the jboss server. It is always a pain to get any IDE to like our directory layout. -dain I would go so far as to say that it is a pain to get a potential new developer to like the directory layout as well, and that only with a tool like Eclipse is does it even begin to feel feasable to a new developer to navigate the hierarchy of widely dispersed directories (and identically named classes in different packages). Especially assuming that that developer is used to the conventional single package/directory hierarchy used in most Java development shops/projects. While I can see an advantage for the current layout in terms of facilitating working on one small piece of the system, I also think that it adds a great deal of overhead to grasping the JBoss architecture and makes finding other source files/packages that might be relevant more difficult (i.e., find ../../../ -type d 'org/jboss/management' -print). Is there some other advantage that the current layout provides as well? Ant can certainly handle building and packaging up discreet files from a single hierarchy so it's not really a build/packaging issue, right? I could see how one might argue that it makes concurrent experimental development easier (a la Bill-AOP/Hiram-AOP) except that that's what CVS branches are for, right? Sorry if this has been covered on the lists or the forums ad nauseum or if there's consensus that the current layout is the right way. Dave Neuer __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: Directory layout (was Re: [JBoss-dev] JBOSS and SQL Server 2000)
The reason for all the modules is dependancies. This is why you can run different deployments of JBoss. If everything were in a single source tree, it would be almost impossible to run without everything. -dain On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 04:00 PM, Dave Neuer wrote: --- Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I agree about the eclipse discussion, but it does actually have a point for development of the jboss server. It is always a pain to get any IDE to like our directory layout. -dain I would go so far as to say that it is a pain to get a potential new developer to like the directory layout as well, and that only with a tool like Eclipse is does it even begin to feel feasable to a new developer to navigate the hierarchy of widely dispersed directories (and identically named classes in different packages). Especially assuming that that developer is used to the conventional single package/directory hierarchy used in most Java development shops/projects. While I can see an advantage for the current layout in terms of facilitating working on one small piece of the system, I also think that it adds a great deal of overhead to grasping the JBoss architecture and makes finding other source files/packages that might be relevant more difficult (i.e., find ../../../ -type d 'org/jboss/management' -print). Is there some other advantage that the current layout provides as well? Ant can certainly handle building and packaging up discreet files from a single hierarchy so it's not really a build/packaging issue, right? I could see how one might argue that it makes concurrent experimental development easier (a la Bill-AOP/Hiram-AOP) except that that's what CVS branches are for, right? Sorry if this has been covered on the lists or the forums ad nauseum or if there's consensus that the current layout is the right way. Dave Neuer __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: Directory layout (was Re: [JBoss-dev] JBOSS and SQL Server 2000)
Early in 2.x development we had one module, as you seem to be recommending. Personally I still think we would be developing 2.x level features without the module structure. Among the many advantages modules give you are the ability to know where a feature ends, the ability to easily enforce and document limited dependencies between modules, and the ability to have module-level unit tests. We aren't taking very good advantage of most of these, but IMNSHO the extent we have has made development of jboss 3 and 4 conceivable. I think most of the problems you mention are due to incomplete modularization of the original 2.2 or so project. For instance, just now am I removing the last extraneous bits of the tm from the server module (and only in jb4). The other project I have worked with that has adopted a modularized structure similar to jboss has experienced similar gains in development freedom and maintainability. david jencks On 2003.02.27 17:00 Dave Neuer wrote: --- Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I agree about the eclipse discussion, but it does actually have a point for development of the jboss server. It is always a pain to get any IDE to like our directory layout. -dain I would go so far as to say that it is a pain to get a potential new developer to like the directory layout as well, and that only with a tool like Eclipse is does it even begin to feel feasable to a new developer to navigate the hierarchy of widely dispersed directories (and identically named classes in different packages). Especially assuming that that developer is used to the conventional single package/directory hierarchy used in most Java development shops/projects. While I can see an advantage for the current layout in terms of facilitating working on one small piece of the system, I also think that it adds a great deal of overhead to grasping the JBoss architecture and makes finding other source files/packages that might be relevant more difficult (i.e., find ../../../ -type d 'org/jboss/management' -print). Is there some other advantage that the current layout provides as well? Ant can certainly handle building and packaging up discreet files from a single hierarchy so it's not really a build/packaging issue, right? I could see how one might argue that it makes concurrent experimental development easier (a la Bill-AOP/Hiram-AOP) except that that's what CVS branches are for, right? Sorry if this has been covered on the lists or the forums ad nauseum or if there's consensus that the current layout is the right way. Dave Neuer __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
