[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lucene-dev
Subject:    Re: too many classes visible with "ant javadocs"
From:       Erik Hatcher <erik () ehatchersolutions ! com>
Date:       2005-05-02 8:40:53
Message-ID: 66584540e269bf02838d5a8d8990a0cc () ehatchersolutions ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On May 1, 2005, at 9:32 PM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>> junit.jar really ought to be removed from our repository.  Due to
>> classloader issues, <junit> doesn't work with junit.jar anywhere but 
>> in
>> the classpath that launches Ant.  The Ant best practice is to put
>> junit.jar in ANT_HOME/lib anyway.  I have adjusted the build file that
>> I'll check in later to account for this.
>
> I disagree that this is a "best practice."  At best, it is a horrible
> workaround for two tools that ought to work better together, but don't,
> for reasons that no one has been able to explain compellingly.

By "best", I meant its the best alternative to dealing with it.

I haven't spent any time fiddling with the gory details of the 
classloader issue.  The <junit> task is the highest profile one, but 
other tasks that require 3rd libraries suffer the same issue like <scp> 
and <ftd> for example.

The explanations have been made on the Ant e-mail lists - I'd have to 
dig to find the most technically detailed one and don't have it readily 
at hand.

>  What if you have different projects which use the same version of ANT
> but use different versions of JUnit?  You're screwed.

That is a very unlikely occurrence.  JUnit 3.8.1 has been the only 
necessary version for a long time.  And you wouldn't be screwed, you'd 
just pull junit.jar out of ANT_HOME/lib but ensure that the one you 
wanted was in the classpath for each project's build... via 
build.bat/.sh scripts instead of using Ant's built-in launcher scripts 
directly.

> What we've taken to doing is to "neuter" ANT by removing optional.jar,
> and add optional.jar to the lib/ directory of every project, along with
> junit.  While this is not really a great practice either, it does
> provide more flexibility.

optional.jar?  What version of Ant are you running?!  That's pre-v1.6.  
optional.jar was split into separate JAR files for each 3rd party 
dependency.

All because of junit.jar you do that?  Why can't all your projects use 
the same junit.jar?

	Erik


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]