+1
A possibility is to check the excalibur-cli.jar file in to our tree and when we build axis.jar, we include all the class files in excalibur-cli.jar in it. This removes the big problem of having another (really small and uninteresting) jar file from the CLASSPATH but allows us to stay in sync with the code. The problem with this is I don't grok ant well enough to do it myself. If no one is interested in this, I vote 2.b, copy the classes into org.apache.axis. -- Tom Jordahl -----Original Message----- From: Russell Butek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 3:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: clutil.jar vs excalibur-cli.jar - get rid of them! We've been discussing what to do with the clutil.jar vs excalibur-cli.jar problem. The excalibur folks last week changed the name of clutil.jar to excalibur-cli.jar. We didn't want to change this ourselves right before the beta, so the beta is goind out with clutil.jar. But we have to change it post beta. But we really don't care much about keeping up with excalibur's version of the cli. What we use works, it hasn't changed in months anyway, and it's doubtful whether we'll ever care if it DOES change. So Tom suggested getting rid of the dependency on a cli jar file by putting the files that we need (4 of them) into the axis build tree and don't depend on the excalibur builds. So a couple questions: 1. Do folks agree that this is a good idea? (If you don't agree, then we will use excalibur-cli.jar) 2. If you do think it's a good idea, how should we package the files: 2.a. With their original names? (org.apache.avalon.excalibur.cli...) 2.b. Change the names so they're in org.apache.axis.utils... 2.c. Some other suggestion? My vote is: 1. +1 2. b. Russell Butek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
