On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> >>> >>>> - why the appearance of transitive dependencies in projects that >>>> depend on the aggregate jar is the shade plugin's fault. Surely this >>>> is our fault for not marking the dependency on the base pom as >>>> optional in the aggregate jar pom. >>>> >>> >>> I may be missing what you're suggesting but if they're optional or >>> provided then they wont get included in the aggregate jar which isn't >>> what we want. >>> >>> ...ant >>> >> >> Is that really true for optional dependencies? >> >> Simon >> >> -- >> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org >> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com >> > > And I mean to say I'll give it a go and see if I can make it work. > > Simon > > > -- > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com >
Well I may of course be missing something important but it seems to work to me. I've done enough local changes to make this work... - add host-webapp and implementation-web-runtime to the base runtime (not sure this is the right place for these but it was convenient) - made the pom dependencies in the aggregation jars optional - added and exclusion to the base aggregation to remove the servlet api from the base runtime aggregation This creates a war not far off the same size as the war created using the base shade dependency. The war has one entry in the lib directory (tuscany-base-runtime-aggregation-2.0-SNAPSHOT.jar) and it works in the unit test and when deployed to tomcat. I'll check in these changes once I've done a build. Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
