IMO uberjar is more trouble than it is worth. --jason
-----Original Message----- From: "Alan D. Cabrera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:26:09 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: Geronimo Specs 1.1-SNAPSHOT -- more opinions please! David Blevins wrote, On 1/30/2006 11:39 AM: > > On Jan 30, 2006, at 11:24 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > >> If we moved to Maven 2 and used its transitive dependencies, would >> the the need for an Uber jar be obviated? > > > For maven 2 all we need is an uber pom. For people on maven 1 and ant > and plain IDEs, an uber jar is nice. Following that line of reasoning, should we not have a super-uber jar that contains the specs, Geronimo, and its depdendencies? I think that it's better to do away w/ the uber jar all together. Regards, Alan
