> What are the exact reasons you don't like a source > distribution? If I were working on my own then there's not a huge problem, but this isn't the case. There are several agencies involved and the usual political difficulties when changing things like build files and versions. Someone walking into this to do a request fix. but has no previous knowledge of the application gets bogged down, having to understand that cocoon needs building, the build scripts have grown in complication to the point of being unmaintainable.
Being able to have a cocoon based project, define the dependencies in the project.xml (or even an ant build file) build your source code and webapp resources into a war, would be a huge step in the right direction. Its the little things that count.Someone on the original thread mentioned the classic ./configure;make with ./build.sh;:/cocoon.sh , isn't that the point? Mark On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:34:05 +0100, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>and without requiring to compile the > >>>framework itself. > >> > >>We know this - we are working on getting rid of the compilation step with > >>2.2 again. > > > > > > I'll shutup then. > > Just wondering... > > Which part of calling "./build.sh" is the big problem again? :-P > > ..but seriously - from a user's point of view: > What are the exact reasons you don't like a source > distribution? > > cheers > -- > Torsten > > >
