It's simply ease of use to be able to drop them into a container as
Craig suggests. Far more people would complain about a version in the
target directory and having to setup a context file :)
So are you saying it is un-maven-like to be user friendly? :)
Basically the rule is you can do whatever you want in 'target' and you
can do whatever you want when you pull something out of the repo, but
in the repo the filename needs to follow the convention. In this vein
there was no problem leaving the version off in target/ for
convenience (though you can add it back by changing the property as
suggested).
Hope that helps.
Cheers,
Brett
On 8/24/05, Jamie Bisotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/23/05, Craig S. Cottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Aug 23, 2005, at 11:41, Jamie Bisotti wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your response. Sorry, I didn't ask my question clearly
> > > enough. I understand what it is doing and that it is doing things per
> > > the documentation. I guess my real question is why does
> > > 'maven.war.final.name' not default to
> > > ${pom.artifactId}-${pom.version}.war? This seems to go against "the
> > > Maven way".
> > >
> > > As I'm typing this, it seems like maybe this came up on the list
> > > recently; however, a quick search didn't find it. If so, and this has
> > > already been addressed, a pointer to the thread would be greatly
> > > appreciated.
> >
> > I don't remember this coming up recently, but I'm pretty sure it's come
> > up before. I know the answer to this, which means that I got the answer
> > from someone smarter than me. :-)
> >
> > Some servlet containers (like Tomcat 5, maybe?) deploy a webapp to a
> > URL that's a function of the warfile name. (For instance, "myapp.war"
> > might be deployed to "http://www.example.com/myapp";.) If the warfile
> > name changes, the URL changes -- and that's probably undesired
> > behavior.
> >
> > - --
> > Craig S. Cottingham
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > OpenPGP key available from:
> > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7977F79C
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
> >
> > iD8DBQFDC1YrEJLQ3Hl395wRAkRdAJ4x9zlR3SNHO8x9g4UqB3lccWJFGwCeP+bQ
> > YfwMjiJsOmZY8Gi1/esj268=
> > =MYc6
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> Craig,
>
> Thanks for the quick response. The behavior you describe is the
> default behavior, for Tomcat at least, but can be modified by
> supplying a context.xml which tells the container what context to
> deploy the webapp to. I'm assuming other servlet containers have
> similar functionality. So, my question still stands: Why does
> 'maven.war.final.name' not default to
> ${pom.artifactId}-${pom.version}.war? This is highly un-Maven-like.
> Any committers care to comment?
> --
> Jamie Bisotti
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
