[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12501711
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-908:
---------------------------------
the existing jar logic in common-build.xml could be refacotred into a macro
with a a nested tag option so that contribs could add additional items, that
would probably be the cleanest way to support MANIFEST.MF add ons.
on a related subject, when i was setting up the solr MANIFEST.MF i discovered
lots of things are "wrong" about the way Lucene's MANIFEST file is built
(aparently i never raised them in lucene-java, or if i did we never did anythng
about them), here are the comments from Solr's build.xml that we may also want
to fix...
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/solr/trunk/build.xml
<!--
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/jar/jar.html#JAR%20Manifest
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/versioning/spec/versioning2.html
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/lang/Package.html
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/util/jar/package-summary.html
http://java.sun.com/developer/Books/javaprogramming/JAR/basics/manifest.html
-->
<!-- Don't set 'Manifest-Version' it identifies the version of the
manifest file format, and should allways be 1.0 (the default)
Don't set 'Created-by' attribute, it's purpose is
to identify the version of java used to build the jar,
which ant will do by default.
Ant will happily override these with bogus strings if you
tell it to, so don't.
NOTE: we don't use section info because all of our manifest data
applies to the entire jar/war ... no package specific info.
-->
<!-- spec version must match "digit+{.digit+}*" -->
<!-- impl version can be any string -->
> Lucli doesn't include standard MANIFEST.MF
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-908
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Build
> Reporter: Michael Busch
> Assignee: Michael Busch
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 2.2
>
>
> Is there a particular reason why lucli has it's own MANIFEST.MF file? Lucli's
> build.xml
> has an own "jar" target and does not use the jar target from
> common-build.xml. The result
> is that the MANIFEST.MF file does not contain infos like "Created-By Apache
> Lucene Java",
> neither does META-INF contain LICENSE.TXT and NOTICE.TXT.
> Is there a reason why lucli behaves different in this regard? If not I think
> we should fix this.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
