[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-92?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12904558#action_12904558
]
Karl Wright commented on CONNECTORS-92:
---------------------------------------
I've thought about start.jar some more. I think it is essential that maven
produce a jar that is functionally identical to the start.jar produced by the
ant build, including the relative paths for all the classpath entries. Maven
may be unable to directly produce the modules/dist/example output directory in
the same way, but that's a different problem. I don't think there's going to
be room in the world for two entirely distinct ways of running the example, and
I want to avoid that - for documentation reasons, if for none other.
The other reason for wanting the example setup to be identical is because the
example organizational assumptions are partly baked into the jetty-runner code
at this time. Those could in part be passed in as command-line arguments, but
that would make running the example considerably harder, so I'd like to avoid
that if possible.
> Move from ant to maven or other build system with decent library management
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CONNECTORS-92
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-92
> Project: Apache Connectors Framework
> Issue Type: Wish
> Components: Build
> Reporter: Jettro Coenradie
> Assignee: Karl Wright
> Attachments: maven-poms-including-start-jar.patch,
> maven-poms-problem-starting-jetty-and-derby.patch,
> move-to-maven-acf-framework.patch, Screen shot 2010-08-23 at 16.31.07.png
>
>
> I am looking at the current project structure. If we want to make another
> build tool available I think we need to change the directory structure. I
> tried to place a suggestion in an image. Can you please have a look at it. If
> we agree that this is a good way to go, than I will continue to work on a
> patch. Which might be a bit hard with all these changing directories, but
> I'll do my best to at least get an idea whether it would be working.
> So I have three questions:
> - Do you want to move to maven or put maven next to ant?
> - Do you prefer another build mechanism [ant with ivy, gradle, maven3]
> - Do you have an idea about the amount of scripts that need to be changed if
> we change the project structure
> The image of a possible project layout (that is based on the maven standards)
> is attached to the issue
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
