On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 02:53, Brett Porter wrote:
> <Context docRoot="/home/bporter/cvs/.../target/foo.war">
>
> Convenient :)
As I said, you need to update the war (ok, you could usen maven console
for that, but it's not the same). What about:
<Context docRoot="/home/bporter/cvs/.../${maven.war.src">
(+ a maven.xml goal that copies all the dependencies on WEB-INF/lib and
maven.compile.target=${maven.war.src}/WEB-INF/class)
> (admittedly in Tomcat you can do path="/foo" docRoot=".../foo-1.2.war", but
> you get the point)
Yes, I got. But my point is: there are other alternatives to achieve
that convenience (which I'd rather call 'productivity'); one of them
would be simply calling:
maven -D'maven.war.final.name=${pom.artifactId}.war' console
(not sure if it works, but you got the point :-)
> But it -should- be true. Now the plugin has to guess whether to use
> maven.jar.final.name, maven.war.final.name, etc (sometimes - as for cactus -
> this is contextual, sometimes not).
No, it will use maven.jar.final.name or maven.war.final.name, depending
on that it needs the artifact for. Besides, maven.final.name would
suffice, as the plugin wouldn't have a reliable way (except of
maven.multiproject.type, if I'm now wrong) to know the artifact's
extension.
> I would like to think we could reach consensus or compromise on design issues,
> not need a vote. So let's keep talking it through.
Ok, agreed. By speaking of design issues, I'm fine about pushing the
'one artifact per project Maven way', but we should allow users to make
some exceptions for that rule. For instance, in many circumstances a
project might need to build a 'primary' artifact and many 'secondary'
ones, so Maven should support it (without requiring the multi-project
hell). One such situation is where a project's main artifact is a jar,
but it also provides a war to test it and maybe another with
documentation (that would be the case for all Jakarta Taglibs, for
example).
BTW, I have discussed this case on Jira and in the users list, but we
haven't reached any consensus yet:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&by=thread&from=875047
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPWAR-30
So, what do you think about this situation in particular, would the
change make sense or it would be against the design issues?
> I'll email more when I get home.
Looking forward for it :-)
-- Felipe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
