Re: [Gnustep-cvs] r27885 - /tools/make/trunk/Instance/gswapp.make

[David Ayers]

Am Montag, den 16.02.2009, 13:16 +0100 schrieb Nicola Pero:
> These makefile fragments are "supported" in the sense that I kept them working
> over the years. :-)
> 
> But I always wonder if anyone is using them.  I also wonder if there is any
> difference with a bundle ... except for a few variables with a different name 
> ?
> 
> Is it worth merging these into bundles ?
> 
> At the moment, the main difference is that bundles copy, while gswbundles 
> symlink.
> That's the only real difference I can think of.

Well I'm not sure about gswbundles, but in the OPENSTEP 4.5
ProjectBuilder we had 2 WO specific project types and make target:
WebObjects Application (woapp) and WebObject Framework (woframework).

Now WebObjects Application (woapps) is special in the sense that the
Applications got installed into a special
directory: ..Local/Library/WebObjects/Applications
where as ther frameworks actually got installed in the standard
framework directory.

Note that gswapps are actually tools/daemons that (IMO) do not belong in
the "standard" Applications directory of GUI applications.

The woframeworks actually depend on the standard framework yet the
handle WOComponents and some other odd resources additionally, which
install certain files into the document root of the webserver (apache)
for example.

I could imagine that gswbundles was supposed to add the extra
WOComponent handling to bundles.  But I don't know GSWebs history in
gswbundles.

I wouldn't be surprised if the copy/symlink difference is unintentional.

Could you imagine implementing gswframework/gswbundle via
frameworks/bundle and simply adding rules to handle GSW/WOComponents?

I don't know whether gswapps could be implemented as tool plus the
special appwrapper handling, or whether it would be more straight
forward to keep gswapps as a special type (appwrapper for the webserver
daemon in it's special directory.)

Cheers,
David