buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Shahid <jvsha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Why are test dependencies added to runtime dependencies
Date Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:35:42 GMT
Will this change make it into next week release ?

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 2:20 PM, John Shahid <jvshahid@gmail.com> wrote:

> Awesome, let me know if there's anything I can do to help.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Alex Boisvert <alex.boisvert@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Oh, I see what you mean now.   When I added the run task in buildr 1.3.5,
>> I
>> didn't really think about the equivalence to "runtime" dependencies from
>> Maven world.  I wanted the run task to require  little / no configuration.
>>
>> Anyway, looking back at it now, I think it would be better to use
>> run.dependencies.   And following this, we can update other tasks to use
>> it
>> as well.  It will help us align buildr's dependency model to Maven's model
>> as well.
>>
>> alex
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:18 AM, John Shahid <jvshahid@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > What about run.classpath this is the set of runtime dependencies, I
>> always
>> > thought that *.classpath was the predecessor of *.dependencies and soon
>> > run.classpath will be replaced by run.dependencies.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Alex Boisvert <
>> alex.boisvert@gmail.com
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > Well, there's currently no notion of runtime dependencies so test
>> > > dependencies is the closest we have.
>> > >
>> > > alex
>> > >
>> > > On Monday, January 17, 2011, John Shahid <jvshahid@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > Well I'd expect in this instance to add slf4j or commons logging to
>> the
>> > > > compile dependencies and log4j to the runtime dependencies. I think
>> it
>> > > makes
>> > > > more sense to include compile dependencies instead of test.compile.
>> > What
>> > > do
>> > > > you think ?
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Alex Boisvert <
>> > alex.boisvert@gmail.com
>> > > >wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I thought it would be a better default.   Test dependencies usually
>> > > >> include addional dependencies to run the software (i.e., compile
>> > > >> against inteface, run against implementation.)  A concrete example
>> > > >> would be compiling against SLF4J and running against Log4J.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> alex
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Saturday, January 15, 2011, John Shahid <jvshahid@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >> > Hey all,
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I came across lines 174-177 in lib/buildr/run.rb
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >     after_define(:run => :test) do |project|
>> > > >> >       project.run.with project.test.compile.dependencies
>> > > >> >       project.run.with project.test.compile.target if
>> > > >> project.test.compile.target
>> > > >> >     end
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > My question is why are the dependencies used in compiling
the
>> tests
>> > > added
>> > > >> to the run task ?
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message