Oh, and provide some support for it other than 'we want it like this'. (btw Brill, I think you have a good argument, but given the trivial workaround....)
Featuritis is the bane of most software. On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 15:57:47 -0500, Ryan Sonnek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > whoo now, i don't want to get involved, but i do want to let it be known that since > this is an open source project, nothing is stopping you from adding the feature > you're asking for. > * download the source from cvs > * make the change you're requesting > * submit the change as a patch to JIRA. > * hope that a commiter will take the patch and apply it to the codebase! =) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brill Pappin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 3:41 PM > > To: Maven Users List > > Subject: Re: RFE for the war plugin > > > > > > > > Michal Maczka wrote: > > > > >On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 18:00, Brill Pappin wrote: > > > > > > > > >>I thought I had explained this? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >You did not. > > > > > >[...] > > > > > > > > > > Actually yes I did, working backwards in time and no > > including the one > > quoted here: > > > > On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:53:47 -0400: > > "The reason I specifically want to do it, is so I can use the > > manifest > > to package extended information about the classes. I think I > > said that > > though..." > > > > At Monday, June 28, 2004 2:21 PM > > "Doing this allows me to use the manifest versioning, labeling and > > dependency parts of the manifest." > > > > I think there might even be a few others I missed. > > > > >>If you want to know more about what I'm doing (and why I'm > > asking for > > >>this), you can get a very good idea at this site: > > >>http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/guide/versioning/index.html > > >> > > >>Specifically take a look at the "Package Versioning > > Specification" which > > >>is link to the URL above, or at this URL: > > >>http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/guide/versioning/spec/ve > rsioningTOC.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >Are you aware of the fact that servlet specification clearly defines the > >location in the war archive where manifest files should go? > > > > > [...] > > >IMO there is absolutely no difference and servlet spec _recommends_ the > >first option! > > > >So this reason is not really a valid one and there is no any other valid > >reason why this should be done. At least I am not going to do this. > > > > > > > Have you tried to do it with the war? > Did you even read that spec? Obviously not. > The classloader loads the jar and the respective versioning information > not the webapp container that loads the war! > Remember that in this day and age all list mail gets archived so what > you just said above will be preserved forever. > > Michal, you are leading me to believe that you are the originator for > this plugin. If that is the case I am hearing some very negative > feedback from a member of this project which boils down to "I'm to lazy > and can't be bothered". > > Not only to lazy to do the work, which would be at your discretion, but > to lazy to even bother looking into what I'm asking for and giving > reasonable and coherent reasons for not doing it. > > I don't think you *must* add this feature because *I* ask for it, but > you owe all of us the courtesy of looking into the request (which you > very clearly have not done). > > This is exactly the kind of negative attitude that is turning people off > of Maven and I find it very disappointing. > > - Brill Pappin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
