Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
ant elder wrote:
Ok, i re-read this last email again [1] and i guess i missed the
"...if we
could make it work consistently, with JARs as well as WARs" bit
before. I'm
not sure I agree with that, why should WARs be hamstrung with a less
user
friendly way of workin
+1. This really puts some certainity into what actually gets deployed.
- Venkat
On 5/17/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
> Ok, i re-read this last email again [1] and i guess i missed the
> "...if we
> could make it work consistently, with JARs as well as
On 5/17/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
> Ok, i re-read this last email again [1] and i guess i missed the
> "...if we
> could make it work consistently, with JARs as well as WARs" bit
> before. I'm
> not sure I agree with that, why should WARs be hamstrung
ant elder wrote:
Ok, i re-read this last email again [1] and i guess i missed the
"...if we
could make it work consistently, with JARs as well as WARs" bit
before. I'm
not sure I agree with that, why should WARs be hamstrung with a less user
friendly way of working just because jars can't work
