[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17234601#comment-17234601
]
Michael Vorburger commented on FINERACT-1203:
---------------------------------------------
{quote}Build is flagged as successful with both war and bootWar tasks but
neither generates the war file in build/libs as war/bootWar step gets skipped
in the end.{quote}
[~avikganguly010] as per (let's discuss things only in 1 place?)
[https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/1404#event-3880579939]:
{quote}not sure what you mean, if I do ./gradlew war at the root of the latest
develop branch of the project, then I do get a
fineract-provider/build/libs/fineract-provider.war. Are you perhaps by mistake
just looking in build/libs instead of fineract-provider/build/libs? That
changed, not because of FINERACT-1203 but as part of FINERACT-1171. Will you
raise a PR to update the README to clarify this?{quote}
{quote}Flipped enabled of bootWar to true and re-ran the command to generate
WAR file. File size is 100mb against v1.4's ~70mb. Should this change be made
in upstream?{quote}
Sorry, I'm confused. What change? Are you basically proposing to revert
https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/1404? It doesn't work. Did you actually
read the discussion in this issue?! :D
> Make WAR non-executable to avoid confusion (because it's broken anyway)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FINERACT-1203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1203
> Project: Apache Fineract
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael Vorburger
> Assignee: Aleksandar Vidakovic
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: image-2020-11-18-14-08-00-290.png, war.log
>
>
> I've noticed that the WAR we build is not a traditional Tomcat only WAR, but
> a Spring Boot Executable WAR - but a broken one! :( Whereas our Executable
> JAR works of course, our WAR with {{java -jar
> fineract-provider/build/libs/fineract-provider.war}} fails to start, see
> attached {{war.log}}.
> [~ptuomola] and [~aleks] perhaps this is something one of you would like to
> look into?
> If you can fix this, then it poses the question why we would build and
> document and distribute and support two different artifacts. My vote, if this
> can be fixed, could be to unify on only having a (both "traditional AND
> Executable") WAR and no JAR. Unless there are reasons why that may be stupid,
> and both are useful, even if the problem above was fixed. Thoughts?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
