Good, following this consensus I updated readme.txt and test.propertiesfile.
Please see them and feel free to update it if you want.
Thanks,
-Wonseok
On 1/3/07, Marina Vatkina <Marina.Vatkina_at_sun.com> wrote:
>
> Out of the 2, #1 seems better.
>
> Please add a note about the ${glassfish.home} into the readme file - while
> it's
> mentioned in GF pages, there is nothing so far that depends on it (may be
> it's
> defaulted somewhere if it's not set).
>
> thanks,
> -marina
>
> Wonseok Kim wrote:
> > Happy New Year!
> >
> > I think there are two resolutions here. Let me know if there is another
> > remaining issue.
> >
> > 1. Leave test.properties as it is (managed by CVS) for running test out
> > of the box and recommend using -D option or ~/build.properties if you
> > want another database properties. Then we just need to add this
> > recommendation in readme.txt.
> >
> > 2. Don't manage test.properties by CVS and add 'sample-test.properties'
> > with 'setup' Ant target which makes default test.properties from the
> > sample file. This will make people modify test.properties freely without
> > concening version control (of course they can also use -D or
> > ~/build.properties).
> >
> > Craig, Michael seem to prefer #1. Marina and other members, which do you
> > prefer?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Wonseok
> >
> > On 1/3/07, *Marina Vatkina* <Marina.Vatkina_at_sun.com
> > <mailto:Marina.Vatkina_at_sun.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Happy New Year everybody!
> >
> > Wonseok,
> >
> > Is this issue still under discussion?
> >
> > thanks,
> > -marina
> >
> > Craig L Russell wrote:
> > >
> > > On Dec 21, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Wonseok Kim wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 12/22/06, *Craig L Russell* < Craig.Russell_at_sun.com
> > <mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com>
> > >> <mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com <mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com>>>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Dec 21, 2006, at 9:36 AM, Michael Bouschen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi Wonseok,
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi Michael,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 12/22/06, *Michael Bouschen* < Michael.Bouschen_at_sun.com
> > <mailto:Michael.Bouschen_at_sun.com>
> > >>>> <mailto: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.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I don't like this at all. I think the tests should run out
> > of the
> > >> box with the default database and default settings. One of
> the
> > >> worst experiences for a new developer on a project is to
> have to
> > >> comb through lots of info just to get stuff to work, and
> > >> deliberately making it difficult is a bad idea.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Then, how about making a new ant target like "ant setup" which
> > >> generates test.properties file from the sample-test.properties.
> This
> > >> adds one more step to run test at first time, but readme.txtwill
> > >> explain this clearly. So new developers can run test on JavaDB
> > without
> > >> modifying properties.
> > >
> > >
> > > I guess I'd prefer that we not add complexity to the process by
> > > requiring another ant setup to be performed.
> > >
> > > What is the objection to having the checked-in test.properties
> > file be
> > > configured with a correctly set up test run? You can modify the
> > > ~/build.xml (not under version control) to refer to the
> > configuration
> > > file you want to test with if it's not the default.
> > >
> > >> It also allows us to modify it directly without concerning
> version
> > >> control.
> > >
> > >
> > > I would recommend that anyone who wants a configuration different
> > from
> > > the checked-in version to use ~/build.xml to refer to their
> modified
> > > version and not update the standard default version. The only
> > reason to
> > > modify the standard default version is to update the defaults,
> > not to
> > > add local changes applicable only to the developer.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > >>
> > >> What do you think?
> > >
> > >>
> > >>> 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.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I like this idea.
> > >>
> > >> Craig
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> What do you think?
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards Michael
> > >>>
> > >>> [snip]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Craig Russell
> > >> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
> > http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > >> 408 276-5638 mailto: Craig.Russell_at_sun.com
> > <mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com>
> > >> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Craig Russell
> > >
> > > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
> > http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > >
> > > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com
> > <mailto:Craig.Russell_at_sun.com>
> > >
> > > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>