Re: $Log$, and general Q? on compilers

[Sh...@lotus.com]

A couple of questions for any Java-based projects about suggested
guidelines:

-- Which Java compiler(s) should we generally use for - in particular for
regular binary releases in projects like Xalan, Xerces, etc.?  Obviously
most 'developers' will probably recompile on their own, but for 'users' it
would be nice to have releases ready to run in whatever environment they're
most likely to use.  I was thinking the obvious choices would be Sun's JDK
1.1.8 or 1.2.2.

-- (a per-project issue) What source-control tags should we use in sources?
Personally I'd vote for including just $Id$ in a set place (top of first
comment?) in every file, and not using any other tags.  However a number of
other developers don't like using this when they're doing diffs for some
reason.
---- Arnaud Le Hors <le...@us.ibm.com> wrote: ----
> May I request that people get rid of the RCS/CVS logs in their source
> files? I find that particularly annoying and would suggest we only put
> $Id$.

Oh, and yes, we're working on making a Xalan-J 0.19.2 release today
(hopefully) compiling against the posted Xerces-J 1.0.1 release, so that
should clear up the compiler issues.  I plan to use the existing makefiles
for this build, and hope to get an Ant build, at least for the compile,
samples, and jarring, for the next release.

----    ----
- Shane         Automation, Test, & Build guy
mailto:shane_curcuru@lotus.com    AIM:xsltest
  http://alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/LotusXSL
  http://xml.apache.org/xalan/index.html

Re: $Log$, and general Q? on compilers

[Ken MacLeod <ke...@jess.bitsko.slc.ut.us>]

Shane_Curcuru@lotus.com writes:

> A couple of questions for any Java-based projects about suggested
> guidelines:

> -- (a per-project issue) What source-control tags should we use in
> sources?  Personally I'd vote for including just $Id$ in a set place
> (top of first comment?) in every file, and not using any other tags.
> However a number of other developers don't like using this when
> they're doing diffs for some reason.

Although I'm not a developer on this project at this time, I am a long
time user of revision control software -- I always prefer to use
$Id$-type tags.

The only reason I can think that $Id$ would cause problems is if it's
being forced to change when nothing else in the file changes.  This
can happen with some wrappers (not CVS, notably) or with release
scripts that update the revision number (not a recommended practice
anyway).  Do the developers have other reasons?

  -- Ken

Re: $Log$, and general Q? on compilers

[Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <Sh...@lotus.com>
To: <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: $Log$, and general Q? on compilers


> A couple of questions for any Java-based projects about suggested
> guidelines:
>
> -- Which Java compiler(s) should we generally use for - in particular for
> regular binary releases in projects like Xalan, Xerces, etc.?  Obviously
> most 'developers' will probably recompile on their own, but for 'users' it
> would be nice to have releases ready to run in whatever environment
they're
> most likely to use.  I was thinking the obvious choices would be Sun's JDK
> 1.1.8 or 1.2.2.

I think that we should stick to 1.1.8 for now.  There are lots of people who
want to use XML who aren't ready to move to Java2.

> -- (a per-project issue) What source-control tags should we use in
sources?
> Personally I'd vote for including just $Id$ in a set place (top of first
> comment?) in every file, and not using any other tags.  However a number
of
> other developers don't like using this when they're doing diffs for some
> reason.

I don't have a strong preference.  Just $Id$ is fine by me.

Ted