Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 8/17/01 11:04 PM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/16/01 12:04 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The dependencies are not detected for you. Geir's little dep engine
> >>> handles
> >>>> this nicely. I started with what I thought I needed for the TDK and
> >>> assumed
> >>>> the dependencies would be detected but they're not. Not a big deal as I
> >>> only
> >>>> have to do this once, but as projects changed it would be nice for these
> >>> to
> >>>> be detected so that you don't have to edit your profile when all the
> >>>> projects change their definitions.
> >>>
> >>> Where can I find Geir's little dep engine? Is it something that could be
> >>> called by gen.java?
> >>
> >> I think he put it in the commons ... hmmm it's not there so but it is in the
> >> commons sandbox along inside jjar. But the dep engine will go into the
> >> commons utils, that's the plan anyway.
> >
> > Sure, if it has a general use.
> >
> >>> In prior discussions with Geir, I got the impression that this was
> >>> intertwined with the downloading and recursion, but if I could have a
> >>> shallow set of dependencies provided, that would be great!
> >>
> >> I used the little dep engine for the java version and it works great.
> >
> > This is starting to sound like duplication of what already exists in the
> > jjar 'stuff', and is leading to a duplication - would it be possible to
> > simply use jjar to get the dependencies? That way, there would only
> > one set of dependency descriptors that could be used both for gumping as
> > well as for general project build and deployment use.
>
> Gump has been around a lot longer than jjar and has comprehensive dependency
> info that can easily be used for a lot more projects. I don't think using
> jjar to get the dependencies is the way to go. Alexandria and Gump, I feel,
> are more appropriate places for this information and that's what I'm going
> to continue with this weekend. I honestly feel that jjar should have been
> based on the descriptors long present in Gump.
I thought you just redid them?
>
> I think jjar can easily use what's in Gump. They are already cleaned up and
> there will be code for parsing these XML descriptors into Java objects and
> this code can be reused in many building related tools. Alexandria/Gump has
> always been slated to be the storehouse for this information.
>
>
> > geir
>
> --
>
> jvz.
>
> Jason van Zyl
>
> http://tambora.zenplex.org
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
> http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
> http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
Well done is better than well said - New England Proverb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
