On 18/06/12 20:09, Michael MacFadden wrote: > Right, > > This would not prevent anyone from editing the proto files and compiling > them. I would just mean that you would not need to do so unless you were > actually editing the proto files. this actually mimics how the ant build > works now. I believe. We don't need to run the protoc compile on every > build currently do we?
No, we don't. But the generated code source is persisted there. As some said, generated code shouldn't be present in SCM. Also, this is also about simplifying the source structure, which is scary right now. Or at least, that's the perspective of a developer (me!) who is more interested in providing API's for developing clients for other platforms, such as Android and doesn't want to mess with GWT, protobuf, string-templates, GXP, etc, etc. > > ~Michael > > > On Jun 18, 2012, at 12:03 PM, Paulo Pires wrote: > >> This was one of the 1st things I've achieved while implementing Maven >> support. >> >> What Michael wants to know is how to provide this to developers, in the >> sense that most of them won't be needing to know what the heck *.proto >> files, how they're compiled and so on. Maven dependency management >> allows us to distribute this centrally, while only instructing >> developers to: >> >> 1) If you want to develop Robots or Gadgets you just need to add a >> dependency for org.apache.wave.wiab; >> 2) If you want to develop OT/Concurrency code for your server, then you >> need to add a dependency for org.apache.wave.wiab.proto and others (just >> an example); >> 3) If you want to change *.proto files and generate new code based on >> those changes, you need to clone/checkout the wave-proto project (or >> whatever it's going to be called). >> >> PP >> >> On 18/06/12 19:52, Yuri Z wrote: >>> I think we need to keep the current state - the generated sources are >>> treated just like other source files. We still can keep the ant scripts to >>> generate the sources if it's too hard to implement with maven. >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Davide Carnovale < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> +1 to have it as a separate project. Imho it will help those who are not >>>> working on it by the means of not having to care about protoc and it won't >>>> add much complexity for those who need to work on that part >>>> >>>> D >>>> Il giorno 17/giu/2012 04:49, "Michael MacFadden" < >>>> [email protected]> ha scritto: >>>> >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> We are still contemplating the organization of the maven project. >>>>> Currently, the protocol buffers are not built on every build. It seems >>>>> that you generate them once (or when you change them) and then use the >>>>> sources. Should we keep this similar in the maven build. We could put >>>> the >>>>> protocol buffers in a separate project that gets built, versioned and >>>>> released. Then the other maven modules could depend on this wave >>>> protobuf >>>>> jar file. This way you would not need to compile the protocol buffers >>>> (or >>>>> even have the compiler installed) unless you were specifically working on >>>>> the protocol buffers. >>>>> >>>>> The alternative is to have the protobuf module in the main build. The >>>>> protocol buffer source would get generated and then compiled in every >>>>> build. Everyone working on wave in a box would need to have the protoc >>>>> compile installed even if they aren't working on the protocol buffers. I >>>>> would mention that the protobufs are already in a separate module, but >>>> the >>>>> module is currently in the main build. >>>>> >>>>> Should we separate it out as described in the first paragraph? >>>>> >>>>> ~Michael >> -- >> Paulo Pires >> >> >> -- Paulo Pires
