ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <>
Subject Re: "Elements of Ant Style": the ./lib directory
Date Mon, 04 Nov 2002 07:01:37 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Gentle" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 10:07
Subject: "Elements of Ant Style": the ./lib directory

> I've finally received my copy of "Java Development with Ant", and want to
> thank Steve and Erik for a great reference!

we love positive feedback

> I'm generally in agreement with these suggestions, but one stands out as
> diametrically opposed to my common practice.  in section D.4.5, Directory
> Structure, the recommendation is to keep library files "with the
> project".  As most projects are managed from some type of SCM tool, that
> kind of implies keeping those lib/jars in the SCM system.

not so sure about this kind of feedback tho :)

> It also seems to encourage deploying and distributing these
> dependent libs, giving us yet another flavor of "DLL Hell".

I'd define DLL hell as the mess of support problems you'd get by not
controlling all dependent libraries, but instead taking what you got, the
counterpoint to that was when some app overwrote a lib with a different
version of a needed library. Static linking to MFC was a good way of
reducing this effect.

Java can have the same problem, and a special mention must go out here to
the version of Oracle client software I installed that went and gave me a
java 1.1. install, complete with .jar bound to that version, despite java1.3
being present. Second mention goes to the Java1.3 runtime that deletes the
binding of .jar to java1.4 in the registry when you uninstall it *after*
installing java1.4. Then there was the time that tomcat had an ant.bat in
tomcat/bin, which was in the path ahead of ant/bin...

> I'm in the process of setting up the build environment for a new
> employer/project (why do *I* always seem to end up doing this?),

Because (a) you secretly enjoy it or (b) you dont trust anyone else.

>and the
> other senior guy on the team leans towards including the "lib" stuff in
> project SCM.  I'm willing to be talked out of my bias, I think, but I'd
> like to hear some other opinions and practices around dependent libs.   I
> know that I'm tired of having yet another copy of jaxp/xalan/xerces
> downloaded with every new open source project I'd like to use.

There is a lot to be said for a skinny redist as well as a fat redist, but
that doesnt mean you dont need SCM control of your libraries.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message