<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Steven Boscarine <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steven.boscarine@childrens.harvard.edu">steven.boscarine@childrens.harvard.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I was going to delete build.properties once I could confirm the TCK
isn't referring to it.<br>
<br>
Does that sound good or would you like to keep the main
build.properties file?</div></blockquote><div><br>That's a tough call. I would say to keep it just because we don't want the users to have to even look into the Ant build file at all. So just in case they don't want to use local.build.properties to override, it is super quick just to replace ${env.JBOSS_HOME} in build.properties with an actual value. It's a file that they see and can easily change w/o reading documentation of any sort. This makes a lot of sense when the developer has a distribution, where SVN is out of the picture.<br>
<br>I think the point is that the build.properties file should just be defaulting to the system property, encouraging the user to control the value that way (no meddling required).<br><br>-Dan<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Dan Allen<br>
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action<br>Registered Linux User #231597<br><br><a href="http://mojavelinux.com">http://mojavelinux.com</a><br><a href="http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction">http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction</a><br>
<a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen">http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen</a><br>