On 8/17/01 11:31 PM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 did originally when I did the first version of maven, but as they changed
so much all the time I started working with the descriptors in gump and
that's turned out to be the better route. Sam keeps them up-to-date and now
I try to do the same.
I gave up on the idea of redoing them and am working with what sam started.
>>
>> 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]
--
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]
