Thanks guys, that helps a lot. Peter
On Dec 23, 9:05 am, Indrajit Raychaudhuri <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Peter, > > lift-base is just a parent model for lift-common, lift-actor, lift-util > and lift-webkit. It's not a real dependency that can be used in a > project. Since you are using lift-mapper, just using lift-mapper as > dependency should suffice. Rest of the dependencies would be pulled down > automatically. > > I just updated your gist. See if this works.http://gist.github.com/262613 > > As davidB mentioned you can also run "mvn dependency:analyze" to filter > out unnecessary dependencies. > > Generally speaking: > > 1. If you are using any of the persistence modules (lift-mapper, > lift-jpa, lift-record) you do not need any of the base modules. They > would be pulled transitively. > > 2. If you are not using the persistence module (possibly because your > app doesn't need such support). Just including lift-webkit should suffice. > > 3. Additionally, if you are using any of the special purpose modules > (from lift-modules), just add that to the lift of dependencies. > > Cheers, Indrajit > > On 23/12/09 7:12 PM, David Bernard wrote: > > > > > Tips : > > > in your project call : > > mvn dependency:analyze > > > you should see the list of dependencies useless and used throught > > transitive path and to list directly in your pom.xml (may be in place of > > lift-core). > > > /davidB > > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 02:31, Peter Robinett <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Indrajit, your post made me realize that I've been using lift-core > > without realizing it. Thanks. > > > Unfortunately switching to something simpler is giving me some > > trouble. I believe that I should be able to add lift-base, but while > > its sub-modules get downloaded (lift-common, lift-util, etc), Maven > > says that the lift-base module is missing and needs to be installed. > > This is the entry I'm using: > > <dependency> > > <groupId>net.liftweb</groupId> > > <artifactId>lift-base</artifactId> > > <version>1.1-SNAPSHOT</version> > > </dependency> > > > As the resident Maven expert, do you have any idea what's wrong? My > > entire pom.xml is here:http://gist.github.com/262244 > > > Thanks, > > Peter > > > On Dec 22, 8:32 am, Indrajit Raychaudhuri <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > On 22/12/09 12:23 AM, David Pollak wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Indrajit Raychaudhuri > > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > > > > Folks, > > > > > lift-core is a 'meta' project that can be added as a > > dependency to a > > > > Lift project to pull in all the Lift modules. This serves > > as a singular > > > > configuration point in a Lift based application. > > > > > However, since lift-core downloads all the Lift modules > > (irrespective of > > > > whether the project needs it), adding this as the > > dependency slow down > > > > things for a standard project that doesn't need some > > additional modules. > > > > > In a sense, we have moved quite a bit from the initial > > purpose of having > > > > single dependency on this 'meta' project in a Lift application. > > > > > Further, the name is a misnomer now! > > > > > The question, therefore is: > > > > Should we consider deprecating this? If not, we need to > > document when it > > > > should be preferred and when not. If yes, what should be > > the time frame > > > > for making the move? > > > > > With Lift 2.0 coming up, > > > > > Lift 2.0 is not "coming up" it's merely a rename of Lift 1.1 > > based on > > > > the naming rules that Heiko proposed and the Lift community > > adopted. > > > > The fact that the next release of Lift is going to be called > > 2.0 rather > > > > than 1.1 does not change the scope of the release. > > > > Indeed, poor wordings, Lift 2.0 *restructure* coming up is what I > > meant. > > > But yes, it ends up sounding different, sorry. > > > > > With that being said, deprecating lift-core is fine by me as > > long as > > > > there is an easy to understand deprecation message with clear > > > > instructions as to how to replace lift-core with whatever is > > necessary. > > > > For deprecating dependencies, it's just matter of persuasion > > > (Announcement, wiki etc.) for at least two releases, or more > > (could be > > > milestone releases). And eventually, dropping it from the build > > beyond > > > an agreeable release time frame. > > > > I couldn't figure out a clean way of deprecating 'meta' packages > > since > > > it doesn't have any active code (thus doesn't expose any place to > > code > > > in some deprecation warning message). > > > > As such, the package is harmless and there is zero cost of > > maintenance. > > > Just that, it's no more a good practice (longer build time, > > larger war > > > size etc.). > > > > > now might be a good time to make a decision. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > Cheers, Indrajit > > > > > NB: An open question to anybody in the Lift: Who among you > > are actually > > > > using lift-core in you project and what is the level of > > impact you > > > > foresee in case you have to move on to have an alternative > > approach. > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > > Google > > > > Groups "Lift" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > [email protected] > > <mailto:liftweb%[email protected]> > > > > <mailto:liftweb%[email protected] > > <mailto:liftweb%[email protected]>>. > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > > > -- > > > > Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net > > <http://liftweb.net> > > > > Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > > <http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890> > > > > Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp > > > > Surf the harmonics > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > Groups "Lift" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > [email protected] > > <mailto:liftweb%[email protected]>. > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] > > <mailto:liftweb%[email protected]>. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
