I don't mind putting it in the
head. I would think we need to maintain the standard make project(s) and
introduce this as a new project type. In the immediate term, to help us
get started, it should go in dormant and not get activiated until the new
project type (or whatever other mechanism we choose) is set up.
As for directories, it would probably be
nice if we had a source folder for each major component of a plugin. As
such we could create a 'build' folder in each of cdt.core and
cdt.ui to hold this.
I'd like to see other opinions on
this, though?
Cheers,
Doug Schaefer
Senior
Staff Software Engineer
Rational - the software development
company
Ottawa (Kanata), Ontario, Canada
-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastien Marineau
[mailto:sebastien@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003
3:20 PM
To: 'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Build Model
Source Code
Actually, I was going to
comment on Doug's proposal to create a branch. Since we are aiming to get a
prototype
of the build model out
for March/April, I think we should just put it in the head (provided it
builds), and have some
toggle to use the old
builder or the new build model. Having it on the head will make it more visible
and accelerate
the build model's
evolution.
Also, could we discuss
where it would fit (directory/etc) in the cdt.core/cdt.ui?
-----Original
Message-----
From: Evoy, Sean
[mailto:sevoy@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003
2:21 PM
To: CDT Developer List (E-mail)
Subject: [cdt-dev] Build Model
Source Code
Hi Sam,
Just wondering
if we could get hold of your source code? Doug Schaefer has commiter priveleges
and I know he would be willing to create a branch and patch onsite here if that
would expedite things for you. In any case, I am looking forward to working
with you on advancing the build model!
Sean Evoy
Senior
Software Engineer
Rational
Software
mailto:sevoy@xxxxxxxxxxxx