Hi Wonseok,
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 12/22/06, *Michael Bouschen* <Michael.Bouschen_at_sun.com
> <mailto:Michael.Bouschen_at_sun.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Wonseok,
>
>> Hi Marina, Michael and Tom
>>
>> I would like to name the CVS-managed sample test.properties
>> "sample-test.properties" rather than "default-db.properties"
>> because it can contain other properties other than db properties
>> and it's just sample. And I will delete the " test.properties" in
>> CVS.
> Using the name sample-test.properties sounds good to me. Are you
> planning to change the build.xml and default the property
> test.property to sample-test.properties?
> <property name="test.properties"
> location="./sample-test.properties"/>
>
>
> My idea was just that sample-test.properties which is managed in
> repository is just sample and users should make test.properties by
> copying it. So build.xml should remain as it is. Do you mean that
> sample-test.properties should be used if test.properties doesn't exist?
>
the issue I see is that it does not run out of the box, because
build.xml defaults to a file that does not exists in the cvs repository.
If I check out a fresh entity-persistence-test directory, I first need
to manually copy sample-test.properties to test.properties before I can
run the tests.
For me the checked in properties file serves two purposes:
- it defines the default properties that work w/o changes
- it is a sample I can use to create a properties file with my database
settings
I would prefer that build.xml refers the file that is checked in. There
is still no need to edit this file, because in my ~/build.xml I can
default to a different file that is not under version control.
What do you think?
Regards Michael
[snip]