some JS library are developped as separated JS files and then merged in a global JS. (Prototype or Scriptaculous AFAIK use that pattern). But maybe a jar resource-bundle would be more generic.
Thanks for the suggestion. 2007/5/22, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Um, IMO, you are probably better off using resource bundles, a jar of .js files, instead of publishing each and every .js file to the repository. Publishing .js files is like publishing .class files, unwieldy and not recommended. --jason On May 22, 2007, at 12:14 AM, nicolas de loof wrote: I also plan to add support for "js" dependencies : - a maven extension for "js" packaging, - integration with WAR packaging to copy js dependencies to webapp/scripts - if possible js transitive dependencies, so that (for example) dependency on scriptaculous would introduce dependency on prototype Any suggestion is welcome. 2007/5/21, nicolas de loof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hello guys, > > I'd like to contribute to Mojo by submiting a javascript dedicated > plugin. The plugin runs Dojo ShrinkSafe to produce compressed versions of > any JS file in a webapp. It also support running JsDoc toolkit to produce > documentation from JS code (similar to javadoc). > It includes documentation based on Mojo submission guidelines > (can be reviewed at http://ndeloof.free.fr/maven-javascript-plugin/ ) > > I plan to add support for other JS development features, like testing > with jsunit. > > I'm also planing to give to the maven community various plugins and > archetypes I'm using in my corporate job, but there is still discutions > about licensing and copyrights to apply, so I can't yet publish it. > > Nico. > > >
