My suggestion is, include ALL the properties files and in your code
look for a system property to choose one. If it's not present you can
default to dev environment or fail, whatever you want.
Then you just have to run your server with that property -Denv=prod
That's it
On 6/2/06, Wayne Fay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you handle this in ant? Assuming of course that you're coming
> from ant, and that you've previously solved this problem.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 6/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Although I could do this for log4j - what about other 3rd party
> > frameworks that use classpath resources for configuration. Log4j was
> > just kind of a stand-in for a more general condition.
> >
> > Do you end up having to spool up and configure all of those resources
> > programmatically in order to externalize configuration?
> >
> > -> I have a somewhat similar issue to what you have.
> >
> > Can you elaborate? This might help my small brain think outside of the
> > ant shaped box it is current encased in.
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kris Nuttycombe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 12:35 PM
> > To: Maven Users List
> > Subject: Re: REPOST: [M2] external config of artifact and dependencies
> >
> > I'm not talking about manually setting up the appenders, etc - I'm just
> > talking about configuring log4j from a properties file that can vary by
> > the deployment environment (i.e, be called something other than
> > log4j.properties.)
> >
> > I have a somewhat similar issue to what you have, except that I use the
> > log4j xml dialect for configuration and consequently have to run
> > DOMConfigurator.configure(...) on application startup. It seems to me
> > that you could do something similar - you still get to configure by a
> > properties instance, but this instance is then selectable at runtime
> > (and potentially pulled from JNDI.)
> >
> > Kris
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >It is more work than writing a properties file.
> > >
> > >Also, I am lazy.
> > >
> > >Which is probably why I want to use maven on my projects.
> > >
> > >Carlos
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Kris Nuttycombe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 11:51 AM
> > >To: Maven Users List
> > >Subject: Re: REPOST: [M2] external config of artifact and dependencies
> > >
> > >Out of curiosity, why is programmatically configuring log4j (say in a
> > >servlet context listener) not a great idea?
> > >
> > >Kris
> > >
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>I don't think my team will react nicely if I tell them that in order
> > to
> > >>have all the maven niceties we have to buy and run oracle app server
> > or
> > >>have half a dozen instances of tomcat running on our servers.
> > >>
> > >>Is this what people commonly do with maven built wars?
> > >>
> > >>What I am trying to figure out is rote for a lot of people out there.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >I
> > >
> > >
> > >>just can't get my pea-sized brain to come up with a palatable
> > solution.
> > >>
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: Wayne Fay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 10:49 AM
> > >>To: Maven Users List
> > >>Subject: Re: REPOST: [M2] external config of artifact and dependencies
> > >>
> > >>One suggestion would be to use an app server that allows instancing of
> > >>webapps.
> > >>
> > >>We run Oracle App Server, and each webapp is deployed to its own OC4J
> > >>instance. Each OC4J instance has its own full directory structure
> > >>which allows us to copy things like log4j.properties files and other
> > >>configuration files into specific webapp directories. So webapp1 has
> > >>its own webapp1/shared/classes type directory and webapp2 has
> > >>webapp2/shared/classes. They run in completely separated memory so
> > >>there is no issue of one app accessing the other's log4 configuration
> > >>file.
> > >>
> > >>In Tomcat, you could do this too, but you'd be to run individual
> > >>Tomcat instances for each webapp.
> > >>
> > >>This would allow you to maintain a single "build" of your code with
> > >>different configurations for each deployment.
> > >>
> > >>Wayne
> > >>
> > >>On 6/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Sorry - about the repost, but my 10 month old daughter has taught me
> > >>>that the crying wheel gets fed . . . or something like that.
> > >>>
> > >>>Let's say I am working on a web application.
> > >>>
> > >>>This application is a maven project configured as a war. During its
> > >>>lifecycle this application will be deployed on:
> > >>>
> > >>>- developer workstations
> > >>>- testing environment
> > >>>- production environment
> > >>>
> > >>>This project has a dependency on log4j.
> > >>>
> > >>>At runtime, my application code is configured to pull properties
> > files
> > >>>with configuration information from a well-known JNDI location. The
> > >>>prop file will include environment specific settings. At deployment
> > >>>time, the engineer responsible for generating the war will, if
> > >>>necessary, also update the prop file (or individual properties) in
> > the
> > >>>JNDI tree.
> > >>>
> > >>>log4j however, looks for its configuration file on the classpath at
> > >>>application initialization. Although you can configure log4j
> > >>>programmatically, that probably isn't a great idea. log4j is
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>configured
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>differently for each target environment. E.g. Developers will change
> > >>>settings based on what they are currently working on, the testing
> > >>>environment is set to DEBUG while production is set to WARN.
> > >>>
> > >>>I don't want to filter the log4j configuration file when I package
> > the
> > >>>artifact. Doing so would place environment specific settings in the
> > >>>archive, compromising its value. I can't use JNDI to configure
> > log4j.
> > >>>So that seems to leave "adding it to the classpath" as the only
> > viable
> > >>>option. Our app servers are tomcat 5.x. Although I have the option
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>to
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>drop the log4 files in <TomcatRoot>/shared/classes, that is the
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>nuclear
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>bomb of config. Doing so may impact other web applications, if they
> > >>>don't have their own version of the resource locally. Moreover, it
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>can
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>only be done for a single application - I can't have two different
> > >>>log4j.properties files in the shared/classes dir.
> > >>>
> > >>>So now I have to alter the exploded web application directory after
> > it
> > >>>is installed and add the log4j.properties file.
> > >>>
> > >>>That seems like a great deal of work and a kludge . . . what am I
> > >>>missing here?
> > >>>
> > >>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>From: Fernandez, Carlos
> > >>>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 10:49 AM
> > >>>To: users@maven.apache.org
> > >>>Subject: RE: [M2] questions about migrating to maven
> > >>>
> > >>>Carlos,
> > >>>
> > >>>EXTERNAL CONFIGURATION OF AN ARTIFACT AND DEPENDENCIES
> > >>>
> > >>>Sorry for belaboring this point - but I tend to think better in
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>concrete
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>terms. Let me walk through a scenario just to make sure I understand
> > >>>this.
> > >>>
> > >>>Let's say I am working on a web application.
> > >>>
> > >>>This application is a maven project configured as a war. During its
> > >>>lifecycle this application will be deployed on:
> > >>>
> > >>>- developer workstations
> > >>>- testing environment
> > >>>- production environment
> > >>>
> > >>>This project has a dependency on log4j.
> > >>>
> > >>>At runtime, my application code is configured to pull properties
> > files
> > >>>with configuration information from a well-known JNDI location. The
> > >>>prop file will include environment specific settings. At deployment
> > >>>time, the engineer responsible for generating the war will, if
> > >>>necessary, also update the prop file (or individual properties) in
> > the
> > >>>JNDI tree.
> > >>>
> > >>>log4j however, looks for its configuration file on the classpath at
> > >>>application initialization. Although you can configure log4j
> > >>>programmatically, that probably isn't a great idea. log4j is
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>configured
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>differently for each target environment. E.g. Developers will change
> > >>>settings based on what they are currently working on, the testing
> > >>>environment is set to DEBUG while production is set to WARN.
> > >>>
> > >>>I don't want to filter the log4j configuration file when I package
> > the
> > >>>artifact. Doing so would place environment specific settings in the
> > >>>archive, compromising its value. I can't use JNDI to configure
> > log4j.
> > >>>So that seems to leave "adding it to the classpath" as the only
> > viable
> > >>>option. Our app servers are tomcat 5.x. Although I have the option
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>to
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>drop the log4 files in <TomcatRoot>/shared/classes, that is the
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>nuclear
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>bomb of config. Doing so may impact other web applications, if they
> > >>>don't have their own version of the resource locally. Moreover, it
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>can
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>only be done for a single application - I can't have two different
> > >>>log4j.properties files in the shared/classes dir.
> > >>>
> > >>>So now I have to alter the exploded web application directory after
> > it
> > >>>is installed and add the log4j.properties file.
> > >>>
> > >>>That seems like a great deal of work and a kludge . . . what am I
> > >>>missing here?
> > >>>
> > >>>BTW - My father's family is from Galicia, with a lot of them living
> > in
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>a
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>coruna. My parents have been a few times and have loved each and
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>every
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>trip. I hope to visit with my wife and daughter soon, and see a bit
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>of
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>the "old country" ;)
> > >>>
> > >>>Carlos
> > >>>
> > >>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>Carlos
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Sanchez
> > >>>Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 12:50 PM
> > >>>To: Maven Users List
> > >>>Subject: Re: [M2] questions about migrating to maven
> > >>>
> > >>>On 5/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Carlos,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>--> re FILTERING PROPERTIES FILES FOR ENVIRONMENTS
> > >>>>My suggestion is to externalie that configuration options in a way
> > >>>>that your artifact is always the same, and only configuration
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>changes.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>You can do reading your config files from the classpath or better
> > >>>>using JNDI.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Sorry to harp on this, but I think I am having trouble thinking
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>beyond
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>the way I have used ant the past few years.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>100% of the differences between the developer workstation,
> > >>>>pre-production and production builds on my various projects are
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>isolated
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>into properties files. These are then pulled into Spring as
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>classpath
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>resources.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that the project
> > >>>>artifacts, wars and jars alike, should not include these properties
> > >>>>files. These files should either:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>- be accessed as classpath resource. Presumably some other
> > >>>>build/release process would deposit them on the classpath, or they
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>would
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>be added to the container's classpath at startup.
> > >>>>- accessed via JNDI. The JNDI entries would either be name/value
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>pairs,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>the properties files themselves or a combo. When the war is
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>deployed,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>part of the deployment process would be to configure the JNDI tree.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Is this correct?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>Yes, that way you don't need different artifacts for each
> > environment,
> > >>>reducing the risks.
> > >>>
> > >>>If you still want to do that you can use profiles to include/exclude
> > >>>properties files in the jar, chnging the finalName so they are named
> > >>>differently. I encourage the other option, but still you can do it
> > >>>this way.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>--> re INTER-PROJECT DEPENDENCIES
> > >>>>
> > >>>>--> With maven the best way is not to rebuild all your dependencies
> > >>>>every
> > >>>>time, but to depend on the binaries generated by the other projects
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>as
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>SNAPSHOTs.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>If I can get past the environment configuration step - then I
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>suspect
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>that this would no longer be an issue. Each artifact would be
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>generic
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>and just as relevant on a developers workstation as it will be in
> > >>>>production.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Carlos
> > >>>>
> > >>>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>Carlos
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Sanchez
> > >>>>Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 2:09 PM
> > >>>>To: Maven Users List
> > >>>>Subject: Re: [M2] questions about migrating to maven
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Hi Carlos,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>re FILTERING PROPERTIES FILES FOR ENVIRONMENTS
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I usually don't like this approach for the inconvinients you
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>mention,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>you need to rebuild your artifacts for each environments, which is
> > >>>>usually prone to errors, you test x-dev in your machine, and then
> > >>>>build x-prod for production, with no guarantees that it's the same
> > >>>>stuff you tested.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>My suggestion is to externalie that configuration options in a way
> > >>>>that your artifact is always the same, and only configuration
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>changes.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>You can do reading your config files from the classpath or better
> > >>>>using JNDI. You can also have dev config as default so your
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>developers
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>don't have to setup anything and you do it only in prod or preprod.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>re INTER-PROJECT DEPENDENCIES
> > >>>>
> > >>>>With maven the best way is not to rebuild all your dependencies
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>every
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>time, but to depend on the binaries generated by the other projects
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>as
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>SNAPSHOTs. You can ensure the repo has the latest snapshot by
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>setting
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>up continuum to deploy everytime somebody changes the project. That
> > >>>>way developers don't have to go through the extra time consuming
> > >>>>process of building the dependencies.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Regards
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Carlos
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>On 5/26/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>>>wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>I am pretty sure that I am over thinking this ;) However, I am
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>having
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>trouble thinking how best to migrate our ant based build process
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>to
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>maven. Principally:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>- Filtering properties files for environments, and
> > >>>>>- Inter-project dependencies
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>FILTERING PROPERTIES FILES FOR ENVIRONMENTS
> > >>>>>As with most projects, our apps use properties files for
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>configuring
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>a
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>host of settings. Many of these (e.g. db settings, log4j
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>settings,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>web
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>service host:port etc) are environment specific. Our projects
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>have
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>properties files for various target environments, such as
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>production,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>pre-production, cruisecontrol. Each developer also has a local
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>props
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>file that they can tailor for their particular needs (e.g. for
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>debugging
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>you may want to log springframework as DEBUG and suppress all
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>others).
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>Ant uses these files to filter the application properties. The
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>result
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>is a build tailored for a particular environment. Since all
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>environment
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>specific properties, beside the local, are source controlled we
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>have
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>a
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>high degree of confidence in consistent and reproducible builds to
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>our
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>shared infrastructure.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>In maven I have been able to reproduce this behavior with
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>profiles.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>However, I am not sure what to do with the resulting artifacts.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>Each
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>artifact is "tainted" with environment specific properties.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Should artifacts generated with "local" only be installed in each
> > >>>>>developers local repository? What about the artifacts for the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>testing
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>and production environments? Should the internal repository only
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>be
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>used to store "production" artifacts? Should there be multiple
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>shared
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>internal repositories, one for production and one for pre-prod?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>INTER-PROJECT DEPENDENCIES
> > >>>>>Currently we have a web based application broken out into four
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>projects:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>1 - user-presentation-layer
> > >>>>>2 - admin-presentation-layer
> > >>>>>3 - web-service-layer
> > >>>>>4 - common-utils
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Each project generates a primary artifact, and the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>web-service-layer
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>also generates a client jar.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Currently in order to generate a fresh build of say the
> > >>>>>user-presentation-layer, you must have the web-service-layer and
> > >>>>>common-utils checked out in your workspace. The ant build file
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>for
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>user-presentation-layer will end up calling the other two build
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>files.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>These builds in turn, get an update from cvs and then generating
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>the
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>appropriate artifact. Granted it took some time to get this
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>process
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>up
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>and running, but it currently works and works pretty well.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>From my readings, it seems that this process is frowned upon.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>With
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>maven, the appropriate process would be to "mvn scm:update
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>install"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>on
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>the web-service-layer and common-utils projects. Then run the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>build
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>for
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>the user-presentation-layer.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Or better yet, have each user pull the dependencies
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>(web-service-layer
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>and common-utils) from an internal repository that is updated by
> > >>>>>developers checking in changes or by some source control
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>repository.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>However, as noted above, because of environmental impacts, I am
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>not
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>sure
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>a shared repository would work for artifacts used in development.
> > >>>>>Currently, our environment profiles only effect configuration
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>settings.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>They do not modify or impact the source code directly. While the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>maven
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>dependencies are a result of class dependencies, which should not
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>be
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>impacted by using an artifact configured for "production" versus
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>one
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>configured for "preproduction".
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>What is the best way to handle this problem?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I am sure people much smarter than myself have already tackled
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>these
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>problems and come up with very simple solutions.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Any and all help sorting myself out would be really appreciated!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Carlos
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>--
> > >>>>I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> > >>>>No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> > >>>> -- The Princess Bride
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>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]
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>--
> > >>>I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> > >>>No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> > >>> -- The Princess Bride
> > >>>
> > >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>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]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>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]
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >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]
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
