> > > > I think commonality should be extracted out; per-back end options left as > > extras to specify as arguments., > > It's not the best solution, but I can agree with you on this ... just for > once :-) > > The best solution would be something similar to what has been accomplished > with the ejbjar task ... > > for compiling with the weblogic jsp compiler it would look something like > this : > > <jspc srcDir="<directory>" destDir="<directory>" webAppDir="<directory>" > verbose="true|false" package="..." failonerror="true|false" > encoding="<encodingtype>"> > <classpath> > .... > </classpath> > <include name="*.jsp"/> > <weblogic noTryBlock="true|false" keepgenerator="true|false" .....> > <wlclasspath> > .... > </wlclasspath> > </weblogic> > </jspc> > > and for the jasper jsp compiler it could look something like this : > > <jspc srcDir="<directory>" destDir="<directory>" webAppDir="<directory>" > verbose="true|false" package="..." failonerror="true|false" > encoding="<encodingtype>"> > <classpath> > .... > </classpath> > <include name="*.jsp"/> > <jasper uriroot="<directory>" uribase="...." webxml="..." webinc="...." > ieplugin="..." mapping="..."> > <jasperclasspath> > .... > </jasperclasspath> > </jasper> > </jspc> > > don't you agree that this would provide the greatest level of flexibility ?
yes, but there is the issue with EJB that we have to fiddle with that task whenever someone adds a new back end; it is one of those things that we want to fix...the jsp and jspc task are extensible without needing ant changes. > > > > > rebuild > > > boolean value to indicate that all jsp pages should be rebuild, so : > > > for the Jasper compiler : don't perform a check on the last modified > > > time, just pass all jsp pages to the compiler > > > > could do; we would be consistent if we didnt do this but relied on a clean > > target to clean up for a forced rebuild. This lets you go "ant clean > build" > > without having separate rebuild=true, rebuild=false targets > > ok, but that means that the jsp name mangler should be per-compiler ... yes it does, but as different compilers mangle names differently anyway, this is a known requirement. > > > > > > now with regards to your last message : > > > > > > - I don't really understand what you mean with the dir naming issue ... > > can > > > you please elaborate on that ? > > > > If I have a jsp page in a subdirectory, how is that turned into a java > file? > > Is it stored in a package name relative to the webapp base? What if the > path > > name is 'illegal' and needs mangling itself? > > I think jsp pages in subdirectories should use the package name the user > specified or use no package name at all if the user didn't specify one I dont know what the spec says here; I will have to look at it. In particular, I need to verify that JSP pages in subdirectories do not pick up a package name from the directory, but instead have no package name at all. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
