NB reads directly the poms, so if you can do mvn compile in a folder you surely can open (the folder) as an NB project!
On 4/24/07, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When I get a chance, I can look into reorganizing things (in a branch) and see if we can get that working properly. I don't want to be subject to mvn eclipse:eclipse, so it has to be something that works with the M2 plugin. Or I may switch to IntelliJ soon ... but in all seriousness, I want something that works for both. In fact, I'd like to get the quickstart plugin to generate the correct artifacts for IntelliJ and even NetBeans (if NetBeans has Maven support). On 4/24/07, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Based purely on the solution Daniel outlined to get things working > properly > I'd say the changes are quite reasonable. . > > Not from a non IDE perspective, but in the everyday reality of dev kind of > way..If something's a pita for a core dev and re-organiziing svn makes it > easier for them I say that's a perfectly legitimate reason. > > On 4/24/07, D&J Gredler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I don't have strong opinions one way or another, but I'm currently using > > Eclipse with a *very* nested project with *lots* of modules (in the > 30's, > > I > > think), and although it's kind of sucky that Eclipse doesn't support > > nested > > projects, it's still workable with the M2 plugin. Also, as long as the > > dependencies don't change, you can still nest the modules and just drill > > down into the tapestry-ioc directory and build it on its own, even if > it's > > a > > child module to tapestry-project. > > > > On 4/24/07, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Eclipse doesn't do nested projects, otherwise I would structure it > that > > > way. And it is important to me to allow everything to be built > > seperately > > > and in layers (I expect tapestry-ioc to be used outside of Tapestry, > for > > > example). > > > > > > On 4/24/07, Massimo Lusetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/24/07, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think things are back the way they should be. > > > > > > > > Great news! > > > > I've only one question, why you have kept the > > > > tapestry-(project|core|ioc...) distinction ? Personally i would have > > > > preferred that trunk would have become -project which contained all > > > > other submodules (core, ioc etc). Any reason why to keep that > besides > > > > keeping unchanched poms? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Massimo > > > > http://meridio.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > > TWD Consulting, Inc. > > > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > > > Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry > > > Creator, Apache HiveMind > > > > > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > > > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > > > > > > > > -- > Jesse Kuhnert > Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer > > Open source based consulting work centered around > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship TWD Consulting, Inc. Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry Creator, Apache HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
-- Andreas Andreou - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://andyhot.di.uoa.gr Tapestry / Tacos developer Open Source / JEE Consulting
