On 8/10/07, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, my concern regarding distribution is mainly with the ant build. > We use the ant build to build the release. The maven build is provided > primarily as a convenience for developers who prefer to work with that > tool. I'm sure the folks who actually use maven can speak up for > themselves, but I would not see any problem with spring not being > optional in the maven pom so long as it's not included in the release > zip created by the ant build.
i'm not familiar enough with maven2 to understnad what an optional dependency is, but it certainly would remove some of the benefit of using maven to have to bring spring into the build manually. i assume that whatever spring jars the build would depend on are marked as build-only dependencies though? re the AbderaServlet and all the bean resolvers and factories and so forth: here's an alternate approach i've taken for cosmo's webdav protocol handler. i use spring's HttpRequestHandlerServlet, configured in servlet.xml with servlet-name dav. HRHS simply looks up a spring bean with that same id, which it expects to implement the HttpRequestHandler interface, and delegates to that bean's handleRequest(request, response) method. i wonder if there's an opportunity to re-use these utilities and maybe cut down on the complexity of the spring patch. i'm not too familiar with spring 2's new xml configuration stuff which you're obviously making extensive use of in your patch, so i can't tell how much of that would be applicable to both the AbderaServlet and HttpRequestHandlerServlet approaches and how much HRHS might obsolete, but maybe the patch could shrink a bit? :D whatever route we decide to go, i'll be glad to see better spring support in abdera!
