Thanks. I was at RubyConf last week, so I was out of the loop a bit. Catching up on things now. I'll give this a go later and verify it works.
-- Kevin On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Done, so now it is > > mvn cayenne-modeler:run > > Andrus > > > On Nov 5, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: > >> Cool. I guess I still can't get myself into that Maven-centric mindset, >> regardless of the fact that almost all my projects are Maven-based these >> days. The plugin still seems geared towards Cayenne developers (vs. end >> users), but I don't see a problem if we have it around. My suggestion then >> would be to place it in a separate plugin though, so that cgen, et al. users >> are not required to pull the long tail of extras. >> >> I didn't mind (or rather notice) all the extra artifacts downloaded with >> Cayenne before, but now I am setting up an internal company Maven repo, >> which I'd like to stay as tight as possible. So that's a good opportunity to >> clean things up in the poms. I guess I may give it a shot, splitting it in a >> separate plugin. Should be pretty trivial anyways. >> >> (BTW, another unneeded dependency that I noticed is asm lib, which should >> use "provided" scope.) >> >> Andrus >> >> >> >> On Nov 5, 2008, at 2:32 PM, Kevin Menard wrote: >> >>> I added it because I found it easier to type: >>> >>> $ mvn cayenne:modeler >>> >>> than to download the modeler, install it into some location, write >>> some script to activate it from the CLI, add the script to the PATH, >>> and then run the script. >>> >>> The thinking was inline with how the jetty plugin works in providing a >>> complete development environment. I did overlook that it would pull >>> all those JARs in, but I'm also not terribly concerned by it. I think >>> when you use maven you accept that a lot of junk you don't use >>> directly is going to be pulled in, for better or worse. >>> >>> Having said that, I know at least Ari had some problems with the mojo >>> that I haven't been able to reproduce. It's something I'm aiming to >>> fix, but am not really sure where to start. My guess is that it's not >>> essential and could go away, although my vote is for it to not. >>> >>> -- >>> Kevin >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:41 PM, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Just noticed that maven-cayenne-plugin has a Modeler dependency. So a >>>> simple >>>> cgen run gets a bunch of unneeded jars to the Maven repo. Of course when >>>> I >>>> removed it and tried to recompile, I stumbled upon CayenneModelerMojo... >>>> >>>> So, why would anybody want to start CayenneModeler from Maven? What is >>>> the >>>> use case that makes it preferable to the normal way of doing it? >>>> >>>> Andrus >>>> >>> >> >> > >
