Thanks. I will submit a request and see what they say.
Two questions though which you may or may not be able to help with.
(1) BSF provides the engines for Xalan, Jython, etc. but the engine
comes externally with the language for Groovy, JRuby, Beanshell, etc.
Do you believe this distinction is irrelevant as far as the
dependency list is concerned?
(2) Do you know if there is a way using Ant Maven tasks to not get
optional jars without explicitly excluding each one? I guess this
is where Ivy's configurations really shine but Ivy doesn't seem
to have the concept of scope without explicitly mimicking it
using configurations. The most common scenario with BSF is someone
is trying to integrate their favorite scripting language with
Java. They wouldn't normally want every known scripting language
to be supported. Under these circumstances is it reasonable to
leave off the optional dependencies in the POM? Any thoughts?
Thanks, Paul.
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
Hello Paul,
Here is what you could add to your POM :
22a23,25
<!--
NetRexx is not available on ibiblio
-->
34a38,86
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jruby</groupId>
<artifactId>jruby</artifactId>
<version>0.8.3</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.beanshell</groupId>
<artifactId>bsh</artifactId>
<version>2.0b4</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.beanshell</groupId>
<artifactId>bsh-core</artifactId>
<version>2.0b4</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>jython</groupId>
<artifactId>jython</artifactId>
<version>2.1</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>rhino</groupId>
<artifactId>js</artifactId>
<version>1.6R3</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>groovy</groupId>
<artifactId>groovy</artifactId>
<version>1.0-jsr-06</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>xalan</groupId>
<artifactId>xalan</artifactId>
<version>2.7.0</version>
<optional>true</optional>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
Check with the maven team or by emailing repository@apache.org whether
it is possible to overwrite the existing POM for 2.4.0 or whether these
additions would have to wait until the next release of bsf.
Regards,
Antoine
Paul King wrote:
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
[...] I hope that for instance the pom of commons-bsf should itself
contain js, groovy, and the other supported languages as optional
runtime dependencies.
BSF doesn't contain optional jars at the moment. The project team
members are fairly new to Maven and didn't have a POM originally.
I put in a request to have a minimal POM put in place but didn't
include optional jars. I am sure they won't mind if you put in a
request to add these to the POM. I will do so myself if I get some
time but not in the next few days.
Cheers, Paul.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
