I'm currently only using the fat jar for development and for
deployment for pre-3.0. If it makes sense for 3.0 to abandon it, I'd
survive. It is just much simpler (OK, lazier) to only have one jar,
but sometimes you need finer-grained control.
/dev/mrg
On 1/2/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> I am considering whether we should stop shipping the "fat"
> cayenne.jar in 3.0 (would've been called cayenne-server-deps.jar
> according to the new naming convention). The original motivation for
> it goes back to the days when full CLASSPATH had to be specified when
> running "javac" and "java" from command line. So it saved quite a bit
> of typing. With Ant, Eclipse and war format this seems obsolete.
> Instead I thought we might include a minimal set of runtime
> dependencies in the "lib/third-party" folder.
>
> Anybody thinks it is a bad idea to get rid of the fat jar?
>
> Andrus
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Jan 04 2007 - 08:38:56 EST