You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@buildr.apache.org by Anders Janmyr <an...@jayway.com> on 2010/03/01 10:45:57 UTC
Re: Idea 7x issues
Rhett, thanks for the tasks, they work well.
I made some changes to allow jdk1.6 to be auto detected.
Use them if you like them.
Anders
def default_components
[
lambda { modules_component },
vcs_component,
project_root_manager_component
].compact
end
def project_root_manager_component
attributes = {'version' => 2, 'assert-keyword' =>"true",
'jdk-15' => "true", 'project-jdk-type'=>"JavaSDK"}
if detect_jdk == 6
attributes.merge!('languageLevel' => "JDK_1_6",
'project-jdk-name' => '1.6')
else
attributes.merge!('project-jdk-name' => '1.5')
end
IdeaProject.component("ProjectRootManager", attributes) do |xml|
xml.output :url => "file://$PROJECT_DIR$/out"
end
end
def detect_jdk
version = ''
IO.popen 'java -version 2>&1' do |output|
version = output.gets
end
version.include?('1.6') ? 6 : 5
end
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Rhett Sutphin
<rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
> Hi Anders,
>
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Anders Janmyr wrote:
>
>> Hi Rhett,
>>
>> I'm interested in the your IDEA changes.
>> I have made a few changes myself to the idea task not to the idea7
>> task, mostly relating to JDK version.
>>
>> Could you put it on github, so I can pull from you?
>
> I don't have the changes integrated with buildr right now -- the new task is
> in the form of an extension embedded in a single project. It's an open
> source project, though, so feel free to take a look:
>
> https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.rake
> https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.ipr.template
>
> Rhett
>
>>
>> Anders
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Rhett Sutphin
>> <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> IDEA project file creation is indeed a slippery thing. I use heavily
>>> modified version of idea7x myself (on IDEA 8) and have avoided upgrading
>>> to
>>> IDEA 9 partially because I don't want to deal with updating that task to
>>> work with 9 (if any are needed -- I haven't actually tried).
>>>
>>> That said, I have been meaning to re-package my custom task as a gem. It
>>> seems to me that this is a better way to deal with IDEA support since
>>> none
>>> of the committers (AFAIK) use it. I agree that a base abstraction with
>>> output that would work with both 8 and 9 (at least) would be nice. Here
>>> are
>>> the features I have in my custom task (which is called iidea) over
>>> idea7x:
>>>
>>> 1) Detects VCS automatically (subversion and git only) with manual
>>> override
>>> 2) Automatically excludes all target and report directories from indexing
>>> 3) Supports manual configuration of source and test paths for each module
>>> 4) Supports low-level configuration of particular IML sections (by
>>> building
>>> XML directly in the buildr project definition)
>>> 5) Provides a "clean" task
>>> 6) Includes all buildr subprojects (not just ones that are packaged) but
>>> allows particular subprojects to be skipped using a project attribute
>>>
>>> All of those except for (4) should be possible using a base abstraction.
>>> I'll see what I can come up with, though it will be a couple of weeks
>>> before I can really look at it.
>>>
>>> FWIW, IDEA 8 still supports the file-based approach. (It's what I'm
>>> using
>>> with 8.1.4.) I don't believe in committing IDE project files (or
>>> anything
>>> else which is generatable) to VCS, so it works fine for me and my team.
>>> All
>>> the patches Alex brought up are minor changes to the existing idea7x
>>> code,
>>> so they use the file-based approach.
>>>
>>> Alex, BUILDR-367 and BUILDR-376 are both genuine issues which I've fixed
>>> in
>>> my task. BUILDR-377 uses a feature of IDEA I'm not familiar with but
>>> which
>>> sounds useful. I haven't reviewed any of the patches, though.
>>>
>>> Rhett
>>>
>>> On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Shane Witbeck wrote:
>>>
>>>> A few things to consider:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. I think we need to define which versions of IDEA these patches
>>>> should
>>>> work with. The last idea7x patch which I wrote was specifically for
>>>> IDEA
>>>> 7x.
>>>> It seems each subsequent version of IDEA (8x and 9x) has had changes to
>>>> the
>>>> way they handle project and module files.
>>>> 2. Version 8x of IDEA introduced a new way of defining project and
>>>> module
>>>> files. It's called the "directory-based" approach. I believe the new
>>>> approach was to make it easier to share project files among team
>>>> members
>>>> by
>>>> checking into a source repository. The older project files apparently
>>>> were
>>>> hard to keep in sync because of merge conflicts, etc. Do these patches
>>>> address the traditional project files or the new directory-based
>>>> approach?
>>>> 3. Having gone through the process of trying to keep changes in Buildr
>>>> and IDEA project files in synch along with changing formats with each
>>>> new
>>>> IDEA version, I finally gave up. I propose a more clearly defined
>>>> approach
>>>> which addresses differences between IDEA project file version formats.
>>>> Perhaps a departure from idea vs idea7x tasks and have one idea task
>>>> with
>>>> a
>>>> param indicating which version to generate the project files for?
>>>>
>>>> That all being said, I'm willing to help in this effort.
>>>>
>>>> -Shane
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Alex Boisvert
>>>> <al...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Alex Boisvert <alex.boisvert@gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Any committer wants to step in and review these patches?
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-376
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-377
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't use IDEA and I'm not familiar with their project descriptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> While we're at it there's also this one to be reviewed,
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-369
>>>>>
>>>>> In lieu of specs (which are sadly missing for IDEA), I could be
>>>>> consoled
>>>>> if
>>>>> fellow IDEA contributors cross-reviewed their patches. i.e., Alexis
>>>>> reviewing BUILDR-376/377 and Peter reviewing BUILDR-369, or anybody
>>>>> else...
>>>>>
>>>>> Just indicate so on the issue itself to help expedite the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks!
>>>>> alex
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://anders.janmyr.com/
>
>
--
http://anders.janmyr.com/
Re: Idea 7x issues
Posted by Rhett Sutphin <rh...@detailedbalance.net>.
Hi Alex,
Anders can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think these are changes which would apply to my rejiggered iidea task, not to the built-in idea7x one.
Anders, are you familiar with buildr's "compile.options.target" option? It might make more sense to set the IDEA JDK from that so that IDEA and buildr are always using the same language level.
Rhett
On Mar 6, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Alex Boisvert wrote:
> Anders,
>
> Do you want to submit a patch so we can update the built-in Idea support?
>
> thanks,
> alex
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Anders Janmyr <an...@jayway.com>wrote:
>
>> Rhett, thanks for the tasks, they work well.
>>
>> I made some changes to allow jdk1.6 to be auto detected.
>>
>> Use them if you like them.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> def default_components
>> [
>> lambda { modules_component },
>> vcs_component,
>> project_root_manager_component
>> ].compact
>> end
>>
>>
>> def project_root_manager_component
>> attributes = {'version' => 2, 'assert-keyword' =>"true",
>> 'jdk-15' => "true", 'project-jdk-type'=>"JavaSDK"}
>>
>> if detect_jdk == 6
>> attributes.merge!('languageLevel' => "JDK_1_6",
>> 'project-jdk-name' => '1.6')
>> else
>> attributes.merge!('project-jdk-name' => '1.5')
>> end
>> IdeaProject.component("ProjectRootManager", attributes) do |xml|
>> xml.output :url => "file://$PROJECT_DIR$/out"
>> end
>> end
>>
>> def detect_jdk
>> version = ''
>> IO.popen 'java -version 2>&1' do |output|
>> version = output.gets
>> end
>> version.include?('1.6') ? 6 : 5
>> end
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Rhett Sutphin
>> <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
>>> Hi Anders,
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Anders Janmyr wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Rhett,
>>>>
>>>> I'm interested in the your IDEA changes.
>>>> I have made a few changes myself to the idea task not to the idea7
>>>> task, mostly relating to JDK version.
>>>>
>>>> Could you put it on github, so I can pull from you?
>>>
>>> I don't have the changes integrated with buildr right now -- the new task
>> is
>>> in the form of an extension embedded in a single project. It's an open
>>> source project, though, so feel free to take a look:
>>>
>>> https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.rake
>>> https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.ipr.template
>>>
>>> Rhett
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anders
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Rhett Sutphin
>>>> <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> IDEA project file creation is indeed a slippery thing. I use heavily
>>>>> modified version of idea7x myself (on IDEA 8) and have avoided
>> upgrading
>>>>> to
>>>>> IDEA 9 partially because I don't want to deal with updating that task
>> to
>>>>> work with 9 (if any are needed -- I haven't actually tried).
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, I have been meaning to re-package my custom task as a gem.
>> It
>>>>> seems to me that this is a better way to deal with IDEA support since
>>>>> none
>>>>> of the committers (AFAIK) use it. I agree that a base abstraction with
>>>>> output that would work with both 8 and 9 (at least) would be nice.
>> Here
>>>>> are
>>>>> the features I have in my custom task (which is called iidea) over
>>>>> idea7x:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Detects VCS automatically (subversion and git only) with manual
>>>>> override
>>>>> 2) Automatically excludes all target and report directories from
>> indexing
>>>>> 3) Supports manual configuration of source and test paths for each
>> module
>>>>> 4) Supports low-level configuration of particular IML sections (by
>>>>> building
>>>>> XML directly in the buildr project definition)
>>>>> 5) Provides a "clean" task
>>>>> 6) Includes all buildr subprojects (not just ones that are packaged)
>> but
>>>>> allows particular subprojects to be skipped using a project attribute
>>>>>
>>>>> All of those except for (4) should be possible using a base
>> abstraction.
>>>>> I'll see what I can come up with, though it will be a couple of weeks
>>>>> before I can really look at it.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, IDEA 8 still supports the file-based approach. (It's what I'm
>>>>> using
>>>>> with 8.1.4.) I don't believe in committing IDE project files (or
>>>>> anything
>>>>> else which is generatable) to VCS, so it works fine for me and my team.
>>>>> All
>>>>> the patches Alex brought up are minor changes to the existing idea7x
>>>>> code,
>>>>> so they use the file-based approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex, BUILDR-367 and BUILDR-376 are both genuine issues which I've
>> fixed
>>>>> in
>>>>> my task. BUILDR-377 uses a feature of IDEA I'm not familiar with but
>>>>> which
>>>>> sounds useful. I haven't reviewed any of the patches, though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rhett
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Shane Witbeck wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> A few things to consider:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I think we need to define which versions of IDEA these patches
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> work with. The last idea7x patch which I wrote was specifically for
>>>>>> IDEA
>>>>>> 7x.
>>>>>> It seems each subsequent version of IDEA (8x and 9x) has had changes
>> to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> way they handle project and module files.
>>>>>> 2. Version 8x of IDEA introduced a new way of defining project and
>>>>>> module
>>>>>> files. It's called the "directory-based" approach. I believe the new
>>>>>> approach was to make it easier to share project files among team
>>>>>> members
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> checking into a source repository. The older project files apparently
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> hard to keep in sync because of merge conflicts, etc. Do these
>> patches
>>>>>> address the traditional project files or the new directory-based
>>>>>> approach?
>>>>>> 3. Having gone through the process of trying to keep changes in
>> Buildr
>>>>>> and IDEA project files in synch along with changing formats with each
>>>>>> new
>>>>>> IDEA version, I finally gave up. I propose a more clearly defined
>>>>>> approach
>>>>>> which addresses differences between IDEA project file version
>> formats.
>>>>>> Perhaps a departure from idea vs idea7x tasks and have one idea task
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> param indicating which version to generate the project files for?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That all being said, I'm willing to help in this effort.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Shane
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Alex Boisvert
>>>>>> <al...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Alex Boisvert <
>> alex.boisvert@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any committer wants to step in and review these patches?
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-376
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-377
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't use IDEA and I'm not familiar with their project
>> descriptions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While we're at it there's also this one to be reviewed,
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-369
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In lieu of specs (which are sadly missing for IDEA), I could be
>>>>>>> consoled
>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>> fellow IDEA contributors cross-reviewed their patches. i.e., Alexis
>>>>>>> reviewing BUILDR-376/377 and Peter reviewing BUILDR-369, or anybody
>>>>>>> else...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just indicate so on the issue itself to help expedite the process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>> alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://anders.janmyr.com/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://anders.janmyr.com/
>>
Re: Idea 7x issues
Posted by Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com>.
Anders,
Do you want to submit a patch so we can update the built-in Idea support?
thanks,
alex
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Anders Janmyr <an...@jayway.com>wrote:
> Rhett, thanks for the tasks, they work well.
>
> I made some changes to allow jdk1.6 to be auto detected.
>
> Use them if you like them.
>
> Anders
>
> def default_components
> [
> lambda { modules_component },
> vcs_component,
> project_root_manager_component
> ].compact
> end
>
>
> def project_root_manager_component
> attributes = {'version' => 2, 'assert-keyword' =>"true",
> 'jdk-15' => "true", 'project-jdk-type'=>"JavaSDK"}
>
> if detect_jdk == 6
> attributes.merge!('languageLevel' => "JDK_1_6",
> 'project-jdk-name' => '1.6')
> else
> attributes.merge!('project-jdk-name' => '1.5')
> end
> IdeaProject.component("ProjectRootManager", attributes) do |xml|
> xml.output :url => "file://$PROJECT_DIR$/out"
> end
> end
>
> def detect_jdk
> version = ''
> IO.popen 'java -version 2>&1' do |output|
> version = output.gets
> end
> version.include?('1.6') ? 6 : 5
> end
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Rhett Sutphin
> <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
> > Hi Anders,
> >
> > On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Anders Janmyr wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Rhett,
> >>
> >> I'm interested in the your IDEA changes.
> >> I have made a few changes myself to the idea task not to the idea7
> >> task, mostly relating to JDK version.
> >>
> >> Could you put it on github, so I can pull from you?
> >
> > I don't have the changes integrated with buildr right now -- the new task
> is
> > in the form of an extension embedded in a single project. It's an open
> > source project, though, so feel free to take a look:
> >
> > https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.rake
> > https://ncisvn.nci.nih.gov/svn/psc/trunk/tasks/new-idea.ipr.template
> >
> > Rhett
> >
> >>
> >> Anders
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Rhett Sutphin
> >> <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> IDEA project file creation is indeed a slippery thing. I use heavily
> >>> modified version of idea7x myself (on IDEA 8) and have avoided
> upgrading
> >>> to
> >>> IDEA 9 partially because I don't want to deal with updating that task
> to
> >>> work with 9 (if any are needed -- I haven't actually tried).
> >>>
> >>> That said, I have been meaning to re-package my custom task as a gem.
> It
> >>> seems to me that this is a better way to deal with IDEA support since
> >>> none
> >>> of the committers (AFAIK) use it. I agree that a base abstraction with
> >>> output that would work with both 8 and 9 (at least) would be nice.
> Here
> >>> are
> >>> the features I have in my custom task (which is called iidea) over
> >>> idea7x:
> >>>
> >>> 1) Detects VCS automatically (subversion and git only) with manual
> >>> override
> >>> 2) Automatically excludes all target and report directories from
> indexing
> >>> 3) Supports manual configuration of source and test paths for each
> module
> >>> 4) Supports low-level configuration of particular IML sections (by
> >>> building
> >>> XML directly in the buildr project definition)
> >>> 5) Provides a "clean" task
> >>> 6) Includes all buildr subprojects (not just ones that are packaged)
> but
> >>> allows particular subprojects to be skipped using a project attribute
> >>>
> >>> All of those except for (4) should be possible using a base
> abstraction.
> >>> I'll see what I can come up with, though it will be a couple of weeks
> >>> before I can really look at it.
> >>>
> >>> FWIW, IDEA 8 still supports the file-based approach. (It's what I'm
> >>> using
> >>> with 8.1.4.) I don't believe in committing IDE project files (or
> >>> anything
> >>> else which is generatable) to VCS, so it works fine for me and my team.
> >>> All
> >>> the patches Alex brought up are minor changes to the existing idea7x
> >>> code,
> >>> so they use the file-based approach.
> >>>
> >>> Alex, BUILDR-367 and BUILDR-376 are both genuine issues which I've
> fixed
> >>> in
> >>> my task. BUILDR-377 uses a feature of IDEA I'm not familiar with but
> >>> which
> >>> sounds useful. I haven't reviewed any of the patches, though.
> >>>
> >>> Rhett
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Shane Witbeck wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> A few things to consider:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. I think we need to define which versions of IDEA these patches
> >>>> should
> >>>> work with. The last idea7x patch which I wrote was specifically for
> >>>> IDEA
> >>>> 7x.
> >>>> It seems each subsequent version of IDEA (8x and 9x) has had changes
> to
> >>>> the
> >>>> way they handle project and module files.
> >>>> 2. Version 8x of IDEA introduced a new way of defining project and
> >>>> module
> >>>> files. It's called the "directory-based" approach. I believe the new
> >>>> approach was to make it easier to share project files among team
> >>>> members
> >>>> by
> >>>> checking into a source repository. The older project files apparently
> >>>> were
> >>>> hard to keep in sync because of merge conflicts, etc. Do these
> patches
> >>>> address the traditional project files or the new directory-based
> >>>> approach?
> >>>> 3. Having gone through the process of trying to keep changes in
> Buildr
> >>>> and IDEA project files in synch along with changing formats with each
> >>>> new
> >>>> IDEA version, I finally gave up. I propose a more clearly defined
> >>>> approach
> >>>> which addresses differences between IDEA project file version
> formats.
> >>>> Perhaps a departure from idea vs idea7x tasks and have one idea task
> >>>> with
> >>>> a
> >>>> param indicating which version to generate the project files for?
> >>>>
> >>>> That all being said, I'm willing to help in this effort.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Shane
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Alex Boisvert
> >>>> <al...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Alex Boisvert <
> alex.boisvert@gmail.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Any committer wants to step in and review these patches?
> >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-376
> >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-377
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't use IDEA and I'm not familiar with their project
> descriptions.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> While we're at it there's also this one to be reviewed,
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-369
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In lieu of specs (which are sadly missing for IDEA), I could be
> >>>>> consoled
> >>>>> if
> >>>>> fellow IDEA contributors cross-reviewed their patches. i.e., Alexis
> >>>>> reviewing BUILDR-376/377 and Peter reviewing BUILDR-369, or anybody
> >>>>> else...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just indicate so on the issue itself to help expedite the process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks!
> >>>>> alex
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://anders.janmyr.com/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://anders.janmyr.com/
>