Re: Accumulated cayenne.jar a bad idea?

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Mon Apr 14 2003 - 08:31:10 EDT

  • Next message: Arndt Brenschede: "Re: Cayenne Examples (data migration tool)"

    I wouldn't argue that documenting the use of cayenne-nodeps.jar is
    needed. An attempt was made to do this already:

         
    http://objectstyle.org/cayenne/userguide/install/postinstall.html#jar

    And maybe even shipping those jars (most of them are Apache, so no
    special licensing considerations exist). But I am still in favor of
    keeping current format of cayenne.jar. It makes the installation and
    first steps with Cayenne very easy for beginners and this goes a long
    way in Cayenne adoption.

    Andrus

    On Saturday, April 5, 2003, at 05:40 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:

    >
    > Some more incoherent Saturday morning thinking.. %)
    >
    >> dependencies for themselves; alternatively we could ship the QA'd
    >> jars in
    >> the lib directory - don't know what kind of license problems this
    >> might
    >
    > ..meaning:
    >
    > - create new directory lib that contains all jars required for
    > cayenne-core and modeler at compile/run-time (i.e. for the
    > distribution)
    >
    > - keep jars required for tests, regression, ant tasks etc. in otherlib
    >
    > - maybe move jars that are only required for examples into
    > <example>/lib,
    > WEB-INF or whatever (struts, tapestry, ognl..)
    >
    > We have to make it really, really clear what goes where and why.
    >
    > -h
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Apr 14 2003 - 08:36:15 EDT