Fwd: random feedback

[szczepiq]

> I already have the eclipse project
checked in.

Yeah, that's pretty cool. It worked out of the box.

>Do you think I should have just a dependency zip?

We should optimize for user happiness ;) I guess If I was a user I
would like to have:

1. zip-with-dependencies - everything that needs to go to classpath
2. zip-with-demo-project - project to import to eclipse, all the
required jars are bundled
3. jar-all - single jar with inlined dependencies

One other thing I thought of is to get rid of the test.jar. Why can't
we just put some examplary DomainSteps in the core jar? It's cheap and
will make things easier for us and for users.

Cheers,
Szczepan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Williams, Wesley <Wesley....@sabre.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:13 AM
Subject: RE: random feedback
To: szczepiq <szcz...@gmail.com>

Thanks for the feedback.

1) yeah this is a good idea. I know I like this when I start using a new
project.  I think the svn is setup that in a way that I can zip its
contents and have a usable project.  I already have the eclipse project
checked in.  The eclipse project has runnable targets for the fitnesse
server too.

2) thanks, I thought I caught all of them but this is why I asked for
the review. :)

3) I think I will do this as part of item 1.  Do you think I should have
just a dependency zip? Or is a full zip with the project and
dependencies good enough?

-----Original Message-----
From: szczepiq [mailto:szcz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:54 AM
To: Williams, Wesley
Subject: random feedback

Yo,

1. I think it might be useful if we create a bundle with working
examples in java, fitnesse jar, eclipse descriptors in one zip. One
could just import project into eclipse/IDEA and have a play with
examples.
2. There's inconsistency between BDDStep & DomainStep. Some wiki pages
say BDDStep, some say DomainStep.
3. We could somehow bundle the dependencies so that it is easier to
start using it (I bet you have it already on the TODO list ;)

Cheers,
Szczepan

[Wes & Evie]

Ok, got you on the user thing.  I will work on creating those downloads.

There is a big reason why I do not include the step class examples, conflicts!!!  If the user wanted to have a method with the same annotation or clashing annotation for a step they would be forced to use a different step class package.  I thought this would be very bad.  So it is cheap but I think it could cause users more trouble than benefit.

[szczepiq]

> There is a big reason why I do not include the step class examples,
> conflicts!!!

Oh, I see now. Makes sense. Unless we use some specific package for those tests.

The exemplary DomainSteps are extremaly useful for the "project"
bundle. The user can play with them: add new steps, run tests, etc.

Szczepan