No, these are only compiled with you specify the -Dgroups=all. Currently the groups and modules properties are the only way to control which module gets executed.
I initially setup the split based on different assumptions based on what I thought our usage would be. Basically though I think that all modules which compile and have tests should be run by default. Modules which don't compile with out extra work (like catalina) will stay out, but remain in the jboss-all project. And the rest? Why keep around a module that does not compile and has no tests? May be a good idea to have an experimental group though. For example, the jmx stuff might go there until it has been polished, then migrated to the standard group (or rather core in this case... depending on if it does not have any external depends). --jason David Jencks wrote: >On 2002.02.23 04:10:09 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: > >>Any reason (once .net compiles) not to make these standard modules >>instead of optional? >> >>--jason >> > >Are these modules compiled with "all"? If so could you make the description >read something like "Compiles all modules, including optional and >experimental" and the description for "main" and "most" indicate that they >include only stable jboss modules? I don't find "most everything" very >informative. > >if not how about an "experimental" target that compiles stable and things >that may not be quite ready for prime time? > >Thanks! > >david jencks > >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Jboss-development mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Jboss-development mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
