Short answer: it was easier that way Long answer: We already have infrastructure in plance to handle many modules one level below the geronimo/applciations directory, where I think this ultimately belongs. I don't fancy trying to explain to Maven that things can be *one or two* directories below applications. But Maven and I don't communicate all that well, so if someone else thinks this should work or wants to take a shot at making it work that's fine. I'd prefer to aim to restructure as we move it out of sandbox, but whatever.
Aaron On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Joe Bohn wrote: > Aaron, > > Is there any reason why you choose to expose the 4 modules directly > under sandbox instead of > adding a intermediate node (say "console") with a single maven.xml to > build all of the modules in > the correct order? This would make things much simpler and keep the > console contributions > together under the sandbox so they aren't confused with other items as > the sandbox grows. > > Aaron Mulder wrote: > > > I have the web console working as four separate modules under > >geronimo/sandbox. You have to build them one at a time and manually copy > >stuff into the assembly repository and manually deploy, but that will all > >be resolved when we migrate it out of the sandbox. > > > > There are two blocking issues right now: > > > > - Pluto is missing one of the two JARs from its Maven repository. I have > > an e-mail in to the maintainer. > > > > - Commons-fileupload does not have a new enough (1.1-dev) JAR in its > > maven repository, and the console does not compile against the older > > one. Geir was going to talk to someone about that. > > > >Aaron > > > > > > > > > > -- > Joe Bohn > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose." > -- Jim Elliot > >
