On Nov 28, 2007 7:09 PM, nicolas de loof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/11/28, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > plugins (war, ear,...) should support and even make it the default, to
> > package the jars using the full group+arifact id, because using just
> > the artifactId has limitations. What happens now if you have 2 jars
> > with same artifactId and version in a war? they overwrite each other
> >
> >
> This would be great in an ideal world.
> Lets consider the required changes :
>
> - war plugin to create required WEB-INF/lib
> - jar/ear/ejb plugin to create the correct MANIFEST entries
> - assembly plugin to bundle dependencies
>
> Adn now, consider how many builds could be broken by such changes...
for those plugins it can be an option, doesnt need to be the default
right away. What i'm saying is that it's the path forward and new
stuff like the eclipse bundles need to be aware of it. The OSGi tools,
like felix bundle plugin already compose the bundle symbolic name with
group+artifact.
in any case those plugins are already broken if there are two
artifacts with same artifactid and version (eg util-1.0.jar)
Now imagine that the eclipse plugins get the name from the artifactId
only, what about the thousands of artifacts that are already in the
repo? org.apache.commons-logging/commons-logging should be
commons-logging in an osgi bundle or org.apache.commons-logging???
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
