Re: Why no multiple locations of sources? ( was Re: inter-project dependencies for the Eclipse plugin )

[Mark McBride <ma...@llnl.gov>]

I also like the idea listed in the email below.

As to Ben's email here are my answers:

Why do you have multiple source trees?

We are using two tools for our projects. One tool is a code generation tool 
for our o/r mapping layer and we would like to keep it in it's own src 
directory to alleviate problems with the tool killing code we produce with 
the other tool.

What is in them?

We have our object/relational mapping wizard driven code in one src 
directory and we have another src directory that is managed by eclipse 
which we write all of our code that uses the object/relational wizard 
created code.

Do they build distinct artifacts?
They build one distinct war/ear for our projects.


Currently we use a jelly script to move the to src's into a "build/src" 
directory used by Maven as it's individual src directory. So each project 
needs this jelly script and it starts to look more like ant projects. It 
would be nice if Maven did this copy for us.

My other concern was somewhat separate from the pom issue of multiple 
sources. I would like a way to define multiple sources so that plug-ins 
like eclipse:generate-project could take them into account and include the 
appropriate src entries in the eclipse specific classpath file. Maybe I 
should start a separate thread on that subject sense it is somewhat 
different then the multiple src pom issue.

I do think that whatever decision is made about multiple source directories 
there should be some documentation stating how maven uses source 
directories, why it does it that way, etc. I haven't worked on projects 
with multiple source directories before so it would be nice to see 
documentation on the downfalls of multiple source directory projects.

-Mark






At 12:40 PM 4/2/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>michal.maczka wrote:
>
> > won't it be simple just to have:
> >
><sources>
> > <source>
> >    <type>java</type>
> >    <path>src/java</path>
> > </source>
> >
> > <source>
> >    <type>cactus</type>
> >    <path>src/cactus</path>
> > </source>
> >
> > <source>
> >    <type>test</type>
> >    <path>src/test/java</path>
> >    <includes>
> >         <include>**/*Test.java</include>
> >    </includes>
> >    <excludes>
> >         <exclude>**/RepositoryTest.java</exclude>
> >         <exclude>**/JAXPTest.java</exclude>
> >    </excludes>
> > </source>
> >
> > <source>
> >    <type>aspect</type>
> >    <path>src/ascpects</path>
> > </source>
> >
> > <source>
> >    <type>native</type>
>      <path>src/cpp</path>
> > </source>
></sources>
>
> > and then
> >
> > <resources>
> >   <resource>
> >      <type>java<type>
> >       .....
> >   </resource>
> >   <resource>
> >      <type>test<type>
> >       .....
> >   </resource>
> >
> >    ...
> > <resources>
>
>I like your proposal very much. I think it's clear, orthogonal, has
>natural space for extension (with plugins, of course) and translate to
>convenient Jelly (applying JAXP exprs on pom) and Java interfaces.
>
>I give my non-commiter + to the idea.
>
>R.
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org

Mark T. McBride
Computer Scientist
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
http://www.llnl.gov

Office: (925) 423-1627
Fax: (925) 423-3140