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 Tue, 18 Jan 2011 19:20:27 GMT
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