Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 15/03/2004 12:04:02 PM:
> +0 to doing it for the maven: tags, -1 for the werkz additions (which I
> don't think you are referring to anyway).
For my curiosity, reason for -1 on the werkz additions (not that I was
thinking about it, but....)
> There may be a problem here anyway because of the classloaders - so if
they
> are split, I'm not sure if you can use different versions across
projects.
Across one project or many? I was simply hoping we could split maven tags
out, so that if a new tag is introduced in 1.1 and I'm on 1.0, assuming
the tag change doesn't use 1.1 features, I can simply upgrade the jar.
> I'm ok with this happening if that is considered and proven to work ok,
and
> also as long as the implications for beanshell or whatever tag libraries
or
> equivalent are also considered so code duplication is a minimum going
> forward into supporting multiple scripting languages in maven2.
BeanShell support in Jelly is busted from memory, so I'm not sure what the
above means. Since the jelly tags are in a separate set of jars, I can't
see any issues arising from classloader support that way, and the plan
would be to have maven-tags in ${maven.home}/lib.
I wouldn't know anything about Maven2.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
