On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> "Craig R. McClanahan" wrote:
>
> >
> > Does it make sense to have commons-cactus-22-$VERSION.jar and
> > commons-cactus-23-$VERSION.jar to be downloadable as well? I'm
> > envisioning that ultimately people are going to start building Ant scripts
> > with targets that go grab just the required JAR files off a server
> > (ultimately this would be done in a "CJAN" style), without having to
> > unpack anything.
>
> I was going to propose something like this soon, once I did a bit of
> homework. I was going to call it "Pottery Barn" or "Bag of Jars" or
> "Kiln" or something.
>
> The idea is to do a lightweight CJAN of sorts - make it so we can make
> 'Fire and Forget' build scripts where we can specify a set of default
> jar names and Ant can just go and get them if it can't find the ones it
> needs in the <shudder> classpath or an external resource properties file
> or something. But we would avoid each component/project checking in the
> jars that it needs.
>
> Is anyone interested?
>
I like the general concept, and am interested in seeing this happen.
Vincent's comment about needing Ant itself to know about some JARs (to
support optional tasks), as well as what the subproject needs, increases
the usefulness even more.
> It would help me square my belief that we should 'virtually' include all
> jars / dependencies in a build so a user has it easy with the valid
> objections of Sam Ruby and other regarding the static version binding
> that this sets up along with and the misfortune of hapless people like
> Craig who are forced to work over <giggle> analog modems sometimes :)
>
You'd think the Westin Santa Clara (where ApacheCon was held last
week) would have decent high-speed connectivity in their rooms,
right? Alas, the router for the floor I was on was down ... grumble
grumble ... at least during conference hours I could use the Speaker's
room, but that didn't help for getting much real work done.
Oh well, at least I'm home for a couple of weeks before yet another trip.
> I would imagine that we would have a managed repository of the jakarta
> jars of all versions, and other resources, such as JUnit. Eventually,
> if this worked well, we would decentralize and ask the Jakarta projects
> themselves to host their own versions.
>
> I will follow this up with a more formal propoal, or just start screwing
> around in the sandbox.
>
Sounds good.
> geir
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
>
Craig
