Hello.
I have not moved to maven, but stopped to use the fat cayenne.jar as
I had some conflicting jar-files. I guess the fat jar is good for
quick-start for simple projects. Sooner or later most people will
probably want to have control over this in the project.
I do not care if we keep it or drop it.
- Tore.
On Jan 2, 2007, at 16:51, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
I am considering whether we should stop shipping the "fat"
cayenne.jar in 3.0 (would've been called cayenne-server-deps.jar
according to the new naming convention). The original motivation
for it goes back to the days when full CLASSPATH had to be
specified when running "javac" and "java" from command line. So it
saved quite a bit of typing. With Ant, Eclipse and war format this
seems obsolete. Instead I thought we might include a minimal set of
runtime dependencies in the "lib/third-party" folder.
Anybody thinks it is a bad idea to get rid of the fat jar?
