Bill Schneider wrote:
> I'm not that familiar with Scarab and Fulcrum, but it sounds like what they
> do is reasonable.  It sounds like they keep the Torque-generated sources
> separated through the build process, which is nice because you can keep the
> autogenerated sources out of source control and only commit the overridden
> classes.

sure, but it's not possible if you use a ide for development (and you want to build 
the project 
using the ide) ... i'm working on a swing app where i use torque ..
generating a jar for the Base classes sounds like a good idea!!

martin

> 
> -- Bill
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John McNally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Turbine Torque Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 12:14 PM
> Subject: RE: pushing base files to a separate jar
> 
> 
> 
>>Creating the jar sounds like an interesting idea.  As I have no problem
>>with generating and compiling the source in a temp directory though, I
>>so question if such a large change is worth the effort.
>>
>>Regarding the move to a /base/ directory, it actually started off that
>>way.  There was a lot of other places in turbine that packages were
>>being used to keep the number of files per directory small.  As the
>>correct use of packages is to put related files together to present a
>>coherent public api this often led to public api's that would have
>>better remained hidden.  I would prefer not to return to this practice.
>>I think it is pretty hard to argue that the BaseFoo and Foo classes are
>>unrelated enough to warrant being in different packages.
>>
>>
>>john mcnally
>>
>>
>>On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 03:43, Eric Pugh wrote:
>>
>>>+1 on the .base directory..  I have often thought about this as well..
>>>Scrolling through all the Base* classes is a pain...  However, one other
>>>change that I made is that often I want to look at my base classes, and
>>
> I
> 
>>>have to first type in a list view BaseXXX...
>>>
>>>If you are moving them to /base/ then how about changing the default
>>>properties to name them with a postfix: /base/MyTableBase.java so they
>>
> sort
> 
>>>nicely...
>>>
>>>Eric
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Stephen Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 4:50 AM
>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Subject: pushing base files to a separate jar
>>>
>>>
>>>One of the annoying things about Torque is that you have all of the
>>>BaseXxx files mixed in with your extensions objects. The Base/Extension
>>>idea is great, but it just sucks having both files in the same dir.
>>>
>>>Scarab and Fulcrum keep the src tree clean by generating the files off
>>>in a target/src-style directory. This works fine, but I'm not all too
>>>keen on it, especially when you go to use an editor like Eclipse.
>>>
>>>So I've been thinking about different approaches to getting the BaseXxx
>>>source files in a different dir. I was debating two approaches:
>>>
>>>- Having Torque compile all of the BaseXxx source files into the same om
>>>package, but put them in projectname-base-torque.jar or something of the
>>>sort. Initially I thought this'd be really cool as you could just
>>>reference the jar from your editor/build process and not worry about the
>>>BaseXxx source files being in the src tree (Torque would compile them
>>>off in a temp dir and then bring them back in).
>>>
>>>Another pro is that not everyone who wanted to build the system would
>>>need Torque...they could use reference the jar. ...But I don't know if
>>>people'd actually be in such a situation.
>>>
>>>But then you have an extra jar to move around and Torque has to been
>>>extending to also compile, not just generate code. So while I still
>>>think this would be very cool, I don't know if it's as practical.
>>>
>>>- The more practical solution, as I see it, is just to have Torque
>>>generate the BaseXxx files in a separate package, e.g.
>>>com.company.om.base, modeling the com.company.om.map. The upshot is that
>>>it's really simple, but helps keep the source tree at least a little bit
>>>cleaner.
>>>
>>>Torque works great for my current project, I'm just trying to think of
>>>ways to make it cooler and easier to use.
>>>
>>>Does either the separate jar or base package idea sound any good?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Stephen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>For additional commands, e-mail:
>>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
>>>For additional commands, e-mail:
>>
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
>>For additional commands, e-mail:
> 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to