Hello,

I noticed in our top-level trunk folder, it looks like this:
* build.xml
* dev-tools
* lucene
* modules
* solr

Perhaps we should add a very basic README.txt to get people started?
I noticed other projects seem to have something like this.

I was thinking something like:

lucene/ is a search engine library
solr/ is a search engine server that uses lucene
modules/ is shared code

To compile the sources run 'ant compile'
To run all the tests run 'ant test'
To setup your ide run 'ant copy-idea-files' (for Intellij) or 'ant
eclipse' (for eclipse)

For more information on how to contribute see <wiki link>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1

(FWIW: i didn't notice until now that those IDE targets get added, might
be nice to standardize on a naming convention... "ant setup-ide-idea",
"ant setup-ide-ecplise", etc...)

: Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 08:05:22 -0500
: From: Robert Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: top-level README or similar?
:
: Hello,
:
: I noticed in our top-level trunk folder, it looks like this:
: * build.xml
: * dev-tools
: * lucene
: * modules
: * solr
:
: Perhaps we should add a very basic README.txt to get people started?
: I noticed other projects seem to have something like this.
:
: I was thinking something like:
:
: lucene/ is a search engine library
: solr/ is a search engine server that uses lucene
: modules/ is shared code
:
: To compile the sources run 'ant compile'
: To run all the tests run 'ant test'
: To setup your ide run 'ant copy-idea-files' (for Intellij) or 'ant
: eclipse' (for eclipse)
:
: For more information on how to contribute see <wiki link>
:
: ---------------------------------------------------------------------
: To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:

-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Chris Hostetter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (FWIW: i didn't notice until now that those IDE targets get added, might
> be nice to standardize on a naming convention... "ant setup-ide-idea",
> "ant setup-ide-ecplise", etc...)
>

i totally agree, i never noticed they were inconsistent before.
But i think we can safely use the simplest target names: 'idea' or 'eclipse'

At some point if someone makes an IDE called 'build', 'test', or
'clean', we can append this-target-sets-up-* to their badly named IDE.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

: But i think we can safely use the simplest target names: 'idea' or 'eclipse'
:
: At some point if someone makes an IDE called 'build', 'test', or
: 'clean', we can append this-target-sets-up-* to their badly named IDE.

*shurg* ... i'm less worried about that then i am about people who have
never heard of some IDE not understanding what the target is for ("'ant
idea' ? WTF does that do?)
-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Perhaps we should add a very basic README.txt to get people started?
> > I noticed other projects seem to have something like this.
[...]
> > To setup your ide run 'ant copy-idea-files' (for Intellij) or 'ant
> > eclipse' (for eclipse)

Actually, 'ant idea' is preferable, since the 'idea' target depends on the 'copy-idea-files' target as well as per-platform targets that tell people where to manually copy the code style configuration file.

> (FWIW: i didn't notice until now that those IDE targets get added, might
> be nice to standardize on a naming convention... "ant setup-ide-idea",
> "ant setup-ide-ecplise", etc...)

-0 on the setup-ide-* standardization - I like the shorter form.  If there were 19 different supported IDEs, I would agree.  But with just two, what's the gain?

Steve

: -0 on the setup-ide-* standardization - I like the shorter form.  If
: there were 19 different supported IDEs, I would agree.  But with just
: two, what's the gain?

i wasn't trying to argue for any gain -- just standaridization.  i wasn't
overly worried baout what hte standardization looked like, but frnakly
this seems like the wrong type of thing to be worried about having "short
forms" ... it's all about the huffman encoding: "ant test" is way better
then "ant build-and-run-all-junit-tests-recursively" but that's becuase it
gets run by everybody over and over and over again.  If these IDE targets
are things people will have to use exactly once when they first do a
checkout on a particular dev machine (and as i understand it that's what
we're tlaking about here) then why do they need to be short?  doesn't
clear and self documenting win out in that type of situation?

</rant>  

honestly, i don't care that much what they're called since as we all
agree, we don't expect to have a lot of them -- it would just be nice if
they were named consistent with eachother, and easy to understand (if that
requires looking at the README where it's explained that they are for
IDEs, that works for me.)

-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------

> > -0 on the setup-ide-* standardization - I like the shorter form.  If
> > there were 19 different supported IDEs, I would agree.  But with just
> > two, what's the gain?
>
> i wasn't trying to argue for any gain -- just standaridization.  i wasn't
> overly worried baout what hte standardization looked like, but frnakly
> this seems like the wrong type of thing to be worried about having "short
> forms" ... it's all about the huffman encoding: "ant test" is way better
> then "ant build-and-run-all-junit-tests-recursively" but that's becuase it
> gets run by everybody over and over and over again.  If these IDE targets
> are things people will have to use exactly once when they first do a
> checkout on a particular dev machine (and as i understand it that's what
> we're tlaking about here) then why do they need to be short?  doesn't
> clear and self documenting win out in that type of situation?

Actually, every time there is a structural change, these things need to be run again.  In the last week, this has happened three times.

> honestly, i don't care that much what they're called since as we all
> agree, we don't expect to have a lot of them -- it would just be nice if
> they were named consistent with eachother, and easy to understand (if that
> requires looking at the README where it's explained that they are for
> IDEs, that works for me.)

Also, at the top level, ant -projecthelp prints out:

Buildfile: build.xml

Main targets:

 clean                     Clean Lucene and Solr
 clean-idea                Removes all IntelliJ IDEA configuration files
 compile                   Compile Lucene and Solr
 copy-idea-files           Setup IntelliJ IDEA configuration files
 eclipse                   Setup Eclipse configuration
 generate-maven-artifacts  Generate Maven Artifacts for Lucene and Solr
 test                      Test both Lucene and Solr
Default target: test

(Hmm, I need to move the 'copy-idea-files' target doc to the 'idea' target.)

Steve

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Steven A Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, at the top level, ant -projecthelp prints out:
>
> Buildfile: build.xml
>
> Main targets:
>
>  clean                 ��   Clean Lucene and Solr
>  clean-idea                Removes all IntelliJ IDEA configuration files
>  compile                 �� Compile Lucene and Solr
>  copy-idea-files           Setup IntelliJ IDEA configuration files
>  eclipse                 �� Setup Eclipse configuration
>  generate-maven-artifacts  Generate Maven Artifacts for Lucene and Solr
>  test                      Test both Lucene and Solr
> Default target: test
>
> (Hmm, I need to move the 'copy-idea-files' target doc to the 'idea' target.)
>

Sorry, then I was the source of the confusion... i used ant -p to find
the name of the "configure IDEA" target and that was the only one I
saw!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Chris Hostetter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> i wasn't trying to argue for any gain -- just standaridization.  i wasn't
> overly worried baout what hte standardization looked like, but frnakly
> this seems like the wrong type of thing to be worried about having "short
> forms" ... it's all about the huffman encoding: "ant test" is way better
> then "ant build-and-run-all-junit-tests-recursively" but that's becuase it
> gets run by everybody over and over and over again.
>

Hoss, we just added this recently, but i find myself running 'ant
eclipse' quite often.

Maybe because i have a fast internet connection and its easier for me
to checkout a clean svn area for each issue (am I the only one that
does this?)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

> Maybe because i have a fast internet connection and its easier for me
> to checkout a clean svn area for each issue (am I the only one that
> does this?)
>
>
I used the 'eclipse' target several times already, thanking you each time
for adding it!

So I prefer the short names.

BTW in the proposed Readme perhaps worth to mention that it assumes Java 6
as the IDE default JVM otherwise need to change it specifically for the
project after each use of this target.