On Wed 17 Apr 2013 11:08:28 AM CDT, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: > > On 17 Jan 2013, at 5:32 PM, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: > >> As discussed a little in HHH-8140[1] and on the earlier Eclipse thread, >> I'd like to look at simplifying the build a bit around making IDE setup >> easier. One thing that came to mind was looking at source generation. >> Today we have source generation occur for: >> * Antlr >> * JAXB >> * JPA static metamodel gen >> * Logging >> >> The first 2 rely on specific tools while the other 2 are generated via >> AnnotationProcessors. >> >> For the first 2, there is really not much to discuss aside from possibly >> to consider adding those outputs to Git. I'd actually be open to >> considering that for JAXB. > > Personally I would not check them in. In my world generated classes don't > belong into the repository.
I agree with you generally speaking. JAXB generated bindings just feels like a different beast to me. Really how often does the XSD change? >> But really it is the AnnotationProcessors I wanted to talk about. >> Currently we apply the AnnotationProcessors in separate javac task >> configurations. I cannot remember all the reasons we decided to do it >> this way originally. But I know that one was wanting to be able to keep >> the output of each (the generated sources) in dedicated directories[2]. > > This reminds me of not so distant discussion on jboss-dev ;-) > I still believe it is nice to have a different output directory for each > annotation > processor and I also like the idea of keeping things separate in the build. > IMO it is completely valid to run the processors separately from the main > javac call. > > I know this creates problems in the IDE setup, but the limiting factor in > this case > is the IDE. It does not really cause "problems" per-se. It causes uncertainty. As a user, who is not a Hibernate developer, I think it is hard to understand why the IDE project is not "valid" after I import it. Maybe this is just another argument for managing the compilation and generated-source outputs separately for command line and IDE projects. >> But we could also just lump all the APT output into one single, separate >> directory (target/generated-src/apt/main, target/generated-src/apt/test, >> e.g.). What this would gain us is the ability for the IDE to run APT as >> part of normal javac. It would be one less thing to set up when setting >> up the IDE project. > > Since I drive the build most of the time from the command line I don't care > that the IDE is not doing the APT processing. For me a nicely organised > build outweighs simpler IDE setup. Is it really more organized/nicer? Not sure about you, but I can tell you how often I navigate into generated-src directory... Never. _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
