Well, that sure sounds like another very intelligent way to do it. Would you mind sharing the portion of your POM that takes care of this sort of functionality? Further, do you incorporate your "other" dependencies into the jar after ProGuard is done with the obfuscation, or do you always keep them outside? Thanks so much for the insight Dirk!
Cheers. On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 09:43, Dirk Olmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mikel Cármenes Cavia wrote: > >> I wonder if this could have anything to do with the libraries themselves >> being obfuscated, thus why some stuff can't be found. Is there any way to >> prevent these from being obfuscated? I know of the easiest way, and that >> would be for all the jar's to sit outside of the main application .jar, >> however I would like to keep them inside. Other than that, I can't really >> think of why this would be happening... >> > > I think your analysis is spot on, Mikel. I worked around this using a > slightly different approach: > > - only the artifacts in my jar are obfuscated > - I use the dependency plugin to list all the "other" dependencies into a > temporary file > - I use the exec plugin to read in that file and fill out a proguard > template file which is then passed as config into the proguard plugin. > > While this approach is somewhat complicated to set up it has been working > flawlessly for me for quite some time now. > > > -dirk > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
