On 12/28/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/28/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
<snip/>
>
> Apps:
> shale-blank-1.0.4.zip
> shale-clay-usecases-1.0.4.zip
> shale-mailreader-1.0.4.zip
> shale-mailreader-jpa-1.0.4.zip
> shale-sql-browser-1.0.4.zip
> shale-usecases-1.0.4.zip
These are the assembly outputs that include the sources and dependent
libraries, right?
<snap/>
Yes, sources, any site docs and the war (which includes all dependency
libraries in WEB-INF/lib). Basically whatever the assembly descriptor
does.
I just looked at shale-blank and it seems our wars are including
{avalon, log4j, logkit, servlet-2.4} in WEB-INF/lib. Looks like we are
missing the exclusions in shale-apps-parent, will try to track this
down in a bit.
Separately, I see (and agree with you) that you're proposing to include only
zips, not .tar.gzs. If that's the future, we might as well rip creating
tar.gz files out of the assemblies and save a few more seconds when we run
them.
<snip/>
I was staring at this when I made that list:
http://people.apache.org/dist/shale/v1.0.3/
Looks like we did zip only for 1.0.3. I see the assembly descriptors
produce both. I don't mind having both, its not much additional work
at all. WDYT?
(ii) m2 repo artifacts:
>
> POMs:
> shale-parent-1.0.4.pom
> shale-apps-parent-1.0.4.pom
Don't we need the POMs for all of the framework jars below as well?
<snap/>
Ofcourse, that didn't come out correctly :-) I was focusing on POM
<packaging> but yes, the POMs will be deployed as well (mvn deploy
will do that).
-Rahul
Craig
