Hi Alan, Yep, there's no doubt that we could have a jsecurity-web.jar. It'd be very easy to do. Since JSecurity was designed from the ground up to work in any environment, web or not, it would be pretty easy to extract the web stuff into its own jar.
Aside from Ivy configs being better than maven in expressing transitive dependencies, the other main reason for staying with Ivy+Ant was due to 'customizability'. Modifying Maven to do what you want, e.g. via special plugins, is nasty, especially when Maven upgrades cause your plugins to fail. Allan can speak more about this, as it has particularly plagued him at work. I personally can't stand the suggested maven directory structure. If you have more than one or two modules, the traversing of directory trees in your IDE becomes quickly unbearable. I just don't like it. The current structure we have in place with Ivy however is a lot more flexible and we can change it any way we like. At least that's my .02. And just for clarity's sake, and to quell Joshua's concerns, we don't use the Ivy-generated pom.xml. We manually edit it to ensure its correctness. Cheers, Les On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 3:28 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yep, I read that. All I could see was an explanation on Ivy Configurations. > I'm always interested in what can be accomplished cleanly, if at all, in > Ant/Ivy but not the Maven or visa versa. > > In this project's case, I think that things can be handled by splitting the > web code out into its own jar. > > Of course, I could have missed something. > > > Regards, > Alan > > On Nov 28, 2008, at 9:39 PM, Joshua Partogi wrote: > >> Alan, >> >> Les already written it down on http://www.leshazlewood.com/?p=44 >> >> I must agree that the pom.xml that Ivy generated does not comply :-( >> >> best regards, >> >> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> s/compelling/interesting to me personally/ >>> >>> I don't want to start a flame war... ;) >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alan >>> >>> On Nov 28, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >>> >>>> Near as I can tell this project went w/ Ant/Ivy because of Ivy's >>>> configurations; I'm aware of other reasons but I do not find those >>>> compelling. >>>> >>>> I'm curious about what problems exactly Ivy configurations solved that >>>> Maven did not. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Alan >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Not by might nor by power, but by His Spirit. >> >> Read my blog: http://joshuajava.wordpress.com/ >> Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/jpartogi >> > >
