You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Peter Donald <do...@apache.org> on 2001/08/17 01:44:31 UTC
[vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Hi,
A while ago there was an attempt to standardize build environments between
apache projects. It was never that successful because of inter-project
conflicts for various conventions. One of those conventions was the name of
intermediate directory. Many projects use build/, others use bin/classes,
bin/javadoc etc. However some projects (turbine et al) use build directory to
refer to build scripts and descriptors and some designate bin/** as location
of project specific tools.
Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate directory has
occured in commons/struts projects. Because this doesn't cause any conflicts
and thus could be integrated into all apache projects (ignoring egos) I say
we move towards it. The easier it is to build projects the more likely we are
to see developers work with Apache.
Anyways heres my
+1
--
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
* "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
* and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
* everyone gets busy on the proof." *
* - John Kenneth Galbraith *
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Peter Donald <do...@apache.org> wrote:
> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate
> directory has occured in commons/struts projects. Because this
> doesn't cause any conflicts and thus could be integrated into all
> apache projects (ignoring egos) I say we move towards it.
We will never get a common build structure *because* of the egos
involved IMHO, and as long as there is no common structure all are
equal to me. Given that we have a system that works, I see little
reason to change it. On the other hand I don't want to stop your
crusade, maybe you'll succeed, so make that a +0.
Stefan
Re: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Stuart Roebuck <st...@adolos.co.uk>.
On Friday, August 17, 2001, at 01:27 am, Jeff Turner wrote:
>>
>> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate directory
>> has
>> occured in commons/struts projects. Because this doesn't cause any
>> conflicts
>> and thus could be integrated into all apache projects (ignoring egos) I
>> say
>> we move towards it. The easier it is to build projects the more likely
>> we are
>> to see developers work with Apache.
>
> What does "target" mean, or imply?
>
> I can understand "build" ("the results of the build process") and "bin"
> (binaries, ie non-source, implying build output), but "target" is a bit
> vague to me.. is it where results from all build "targets" go? No..
>
> Enough of the world uses build/ for me to be comfortable with it. My vote:
> 0
>
> --Jeff
I too, would advocate "build". "bin/**" intuitively looks like it might
be binary tools or libraries rather than build output, "target"
intuitively sounds like it might contain target specific build information
- e.g. build code to build variants for different platforms. If there's a
need for something different to allow a consistent move for all, then
something like "building" might be worth a thought, it implies a build in
progress, another thought would be to put all build output into a "tmp" or
"temp" directory giving something like "tmp/build/org/.." and
"tmp/dist/....jar". This makes it plain that removal of the "tmp"
directory does not remove anything that cannot be reproduced from source.
Stuart.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart Roebuck stuart.roebuck@adolos.com
Lead Developer Java, XML, MacOS X, XP, etc.
ADOLOS <http://www.adolos.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@socialchange.net.au>.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 09:44:31AM +1000, Peter Donald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A while ago there was an attempt to standardize build environments between
> apache projects. It was never that successful because of inter-project
> conflicts for various conventions. One of those conventions was the name of
> intermediate directory. Many projects use build/, others use bin/classes,
> bin/javadoc etc. However some projects (turbine et al) use build directory to
> refer to build scripts and descriptors and some designate bin/** as location
> of project specific tools.
>
> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate directory has
> occured in commons/struts projects. Because this doesn't cause any conflicts
> and thus could be integrated into all apache projects (ignoring egos) I say
> we move towards it. The easier it is to build projects the more likely we are
> to see developers work with Apache.
What does "target" mean, or imply?
I can understand "build" ("the results of the build process") and "bin"
(binaries, ie non-source, implying build output), but "target" is a bit
vague to me.. is it where results from all build "targets" go? No..
Enough of the world uses build/ for me to be comfortable with it. My vote: 0
--Jeff
> Anyways heres my
>
> +1
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Lavandowska <fl...@yahoo.com>.
Though I have no binding vote, I prefer "build" over "target". After,
all "build" is what you are doing.
--- Peter Donald <do...@apache.org> wrote:
> intermediate directory. Many projects use build/, others use
> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate
> directory has occured in commons/struts projects. Because this
doesn't cause any
> +1
=====
Lance Lavandowska
Http://www.brainopolis.com/
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
+1
This kind of integration between projects is definately important.
- Leo
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Peter Donald [mailto:donaldp@apache.org]
> Verzonden: vrijdag 17 augustus 2001 1:45
> Aan: Avalon Development
> CC: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org; james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Onderwerp: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> A while ago there was an attempt to standardize build
> environments between
> apache projects. It was never that successful because of inter-project
> conflicts for various conventions. One of those conventions was
> the name of
> intermediate directory. Many projects use build/, others use bin/classes,
> bin/javadoc etc. However some projects (turbine et al) use build
> directory to
> refer to build scripts and descriptors and some designate bin/**
> as location
> of project specific tools.
>
> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as intermediate
> directory has
> occured in commons/struts projects. Because this doesn't cause
> any conflicts
> and thus could be integrated into all apache projects (ignoring
> egos) I say
> we move towards it. The easier it is to build projects the more
> likely we are
> to see developers work with Apache.
>
> Anyways heres my
>
> +1
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
> * "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
> * and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
> * everyone gets busy on the proof." *
> * - John Kenneth Galbraith *
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: [vote] Intermediate directory name change to Target?
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@osm.net>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> A while ago there was an attempt to standardize build
> environments between apache projects. It was never that
> successful because of inter-project conflicts for
> various conventions. One of those conventions was the
> name of intermediate directory. Many projects use build/,
> others use bin/classes, bin/javadoc etc. However some
> projects (turbine et al) use build directory to refer to
> build scripts and descriptors and some designate bin/**
> as location of project specific tools.
>
> Anyways a pseudo convention of using "target/" as
> intermediate directory has occured in commons/struts
> projects. Because this doesn't cause any conflicts
> and thus could be integrated into all apache projects
> (ignoring egos) I say we move towards it. The easier it
> is to build projects the more likely we are to see
> developers work with Apache.
>
> Anyways heres my
>
> +1
my non-commmitter +1
Cheers, Steve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org