Hibernate transactions requires JTA. I'm not sure what the license on that is but I know the artifact is not available through Maven. It would seem that there is also a problem with Facelets which is CDDL.
One option is to make the petstore a java.net project. I'm not crazy about shipping a WAR that is missing a key dependency. The other option is to not ship the WAR at all and just provide very detailed instructions on how to build the app using maven. I'm almost ready to show the initial checkin but I have a few issues with Hibernate and lazy collections. If anybody has experience with Hibernate and wants to help, that would be great. Sean On 7/28/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/18/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Craig, > > I've been working on my own little sample app that integrates shale > with several facelets, tomahawk, spring and hibernate. I was just > about to ask on this list if anybody would be interested in working on > it with me if I contributed it here. > As we have discussed, we all agreed that it would be cool to have at least one example app based on Hibernate. That being said, we have a practical consideration that needs to be worked out. Hibernate is LGPL licensed, and at the moment that means we cannot ship an Apache artifact that *requires* Hibernate (it'd be ok if Hibernate was an optional dependency, but I can't see that being the case here). So, what to do? What I think makes the most sense is to set the POM for your example app up the usual way, but with one exception -- the assembly configuration will explicitly eliminate the hibernate jars from the WAR (and from the "lib" directory if needed). That would mean the included war is not directly runnable, but we can document our way around that problem. And, it also means that someone building the sample with Maven2 *would* still get a runnable application (and thereby nudge more people towards M2 :-). Can anyone see any flaws in this approach? Or suggest something better? Craig
