On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:52 AM, Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > tisdagen den 19 augusti 2008 16.44.24 skrev Shawn O. Pearce: >> Imran M Yousuf <imyousuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > Imran M Yousuf <imyousuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> I would like to request you all to test out JGit from >> > >> http://repo.or.cz/w/egit/imyousuf.git. Please checkout the branch >> > >> 'unified_tst_rsrc' and try to build it with both maven and Eclipse >> > >> (i.e. as was built earlier) >> > >> > Thanks, it would nice to know whether it works in the original build >> > process or not :). >> >> Well, it did break it in Eclipse: >> >> $ git diff-tree --abbrev -r -M --diff-filter=D orcz-pub/master HEAD >> :100644 000000 9d7d138... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit.test/.gitignore >> :100644 000000 987d6be... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit.test/.project >> :100644 000000 8bfa5f1... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit.test/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs >> :100644 000000 fce94cf... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit.test/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.ui.prefs >> :100644 000000 304e861... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit/.classpath >> :100644 000000 ba077a4... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit/.gitignore >> :100644 000000 7d38455... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit/.project >> :100644 000000 709a440... 0000000... D org.spearce.jgit/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.ui.prefs >> >> Removing this stuff was not so good. The Eclipse projects are >> busted and can't be used anymore. We need them back. >> >> The make_jgit.sh however seems to produce a valid JAR. Given the >> file-level differences I didn't expect it to fail. >> >> Also, I wonder if JGitTestUtil is better handled by placing the >> method in RepositoryTestCase and making sure everyone subclasses >> that if they need a test resource file? I'm fairly certain they >> already do, and its a lot easier to invoke a method you inherited >> than one in another class. (Well, easier for the guy writing the >> test case anyway, Java obviously doesn't care either way.) In a true OOP sense a util class seemed a more valid approach to me. I usually prefer to inherit staffs that are actually part of the object, what I can do is have a base class method invoking the util, that will not harm me :). >> >> If we are going to take this in upstream I'd like a flattened/cleaned >> up history. Being able to bisect the misstep of using symlinks >> (the old Maven approach) isn't very valuable in the long-term view >> of the history. >> >> Robin, any thoughts? > > Right, I'd also like to see that cleaned up approch in patch form. Cleaning up > helps when preparing for review because one usually find bad stuff during > that process. I agree with the cleaned up approach I will redo it afresh by tonight or day after tomorrow and create patches and resubmit it. Thanks, Imran > > -- robin > -- Imran M Yousuf Entrepreneur & Software Engineer Smart IT Engineering Dhaka, Bangladesh Email: imran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Blog: http://imyousuf-tech.blogs.smartitengineering.com/ Mobile: +880-1711402557 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
