[Geany] relative paths in project files: is there an option?

[Lex Trotman]

On 30 June 2011 22:10, Stephan Beal <sgbeal at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> Nobody who works with a document-editing tool reads the titlebar on a
>>> regular basis.
>>
>> Nobody?
>
> Not on a regular basis -i know what document i'm supposed to be editing and
> i don't double-check. i look at the tab name, but that's just the basename.

Yeah guilty here too ...

>
>>>
>>> Or you could just have your project file in /usr/src and point to the
>>> project base directory of /usr/src/linux where the current tree will/should
>>> always be symlinked to.
>
> Symlinks typically get resolved to full paths by applications, making a
> symlink useless for this case. (i have not tried whether geany resolves
> them, but assume that it must for portability reasons).
>

I'm not sure what you mean by this, when should it "resolve" them?

>>>
>>> any benefit or any safety against path-related errors. Not only that,
>>> but it challenges common conventions (unsuccessfully, it turns out).
>>
>> The benefit is that you don't have it in VCS, so when you checkout the
>> code somewhere else, you don't have John Coder's IDE-specific project file
>> in the tree pointing to files stored god knows where :)
>
> i don't agree that this perceived benefit outweighs the problems caused by
> the inconsistency vis-a-vis common conventions. Show us _one_ non-geany IDE
> which uses absolute paths in the project file names. In the past hour i've
> been digging around my system looking for project files for a couple apps on
> my system (not IDEs), and not one of them uses absolute paths.

Ummmm, guys, lets be specific, we are only talking about the session
files here, all other paths *can* be relative.

And I agree with Matthew, that session data doesn't belong in version
control. And unless its an in-house project with a controlled tool set
neither does the project file for all the reasons Matthew enumerates.
Note that even Geany doesn't offer a .geany project file in svn.

[...]
> Correct - but many of them have a single project file which the developers
> can use (e.g. maven build files which can be used developer-side to create
> IDE-specific project files). Scons and qmake also come to mind. And _those_
> most certainly _do not_ use absolute paths because that makes them useless
> for cross-machine (or even 2x on one machine) purposes.
>
>>
>>  Still, I don't think it would qualify as "common convention", except
>> maybe with VisualStudio projects/solutions.
>
> Like it or not, VisualStudio _is_ the common convention. i don't use it
> (haven't used a Windows desktop since last millennium), but many, many
> people do. Others which come to mind: Qmake, Maven, and Jakarta Ant (all
> used as the basis for several IDE-dependent project-file generators and none
> of which requires absolute paths).

You are talking about build system control files (make, qmake, ant,
maven etc) which of course live in the tree and use relative paths,
but they have nothing to do with IDE project files (*.geany, eclipse
.project etc) or session files.

Cheers
Lex


> --
> ----- stephan beal
> http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geany mailing list
> Geany at uvena.de
> https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
>
>