oh good point!
There is nowhere mentioned on which server the samples has to run (or I did not
read it carefully enough).
Currently there are a lot of assumptions for the installations (basically all
the dependencies the samples denote as 'provided'), so most people will fail to
run the samples because they need to install those jars first.
On my notebook I did run via jetty, so I changed all API scopes to
<scope>compile</scope> and all implementation jars to <scope>runtime</scope>.
So maybe I forgot to undo my change for MyFaces, but at least this is a good
point for discussing the issue ;)
Imho samples have to run out of the box, without forcing the users to manually
add jars, etc.
What I did sometimes is to set the scope via a ${webappscope} variable which is
set to compile in the jetty profile and to runtime in a JBoss profile.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> schrieb am Di, 3.2.2009:
> Von: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]>
> Betreff: Re: AW: [CANCELED] Publish OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M1
> An: [email protected]
> Datum: Dienstag, 3. Februar 2009, 7:59
> +1
> I will re-start release process today. I will run RAT
> before deploying to staging-repo.
>
> Mark,
> In the samples/guess/pom.xml, there is a myfaces JSF
> dependencies as *compile* scope. Is there any reason why its
> scope has not a *provided*? When the scope is *compile*, all
> dependencies are injected into WEB-INF/lib. I think that we
> mark the Java EE related libraries as *provided*.
>
> WDYT?
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Monday, February 2, 2009 11:39:50 PM
> Subject: Re: AW: [CANCELED] Publish OpenWebBeans
> 1.0.0-incubating-M1
>
> but the release-tag will be on that branch in this case,
> isn't? So deleting it afterwards is maybe not such a
> good idea. Imho all releases must have a tag in the repo
> which exactly matches the released artifacts. But maybe
> I'm too fussy.
>
> Anyway, it's probably better I let Gurkan do the
> release and only make the changes in my local GIT archive.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> --- Kevan Miller <[email protected]> schrieb am
> Mo, 2.2.2009:
>
> > Von: Kevan Miller <[email protected]>
> > Betreff: Re: AW: [CANCELED] Publish OpenWebBeans
> 1.0.0-incubating-M1
> > An: [email protected]
> > Datum: Montag, 2. Februar 2009, 22:32
> > On Feb 2, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> >
> > > Gurkan, Kevan, should I wait with the SPI
> > implementation as long as you do the release?
> >
> > I'd wait.
> >
> > One way you can handle this type of conflict, is to
> create
> > a release branch (e.g. svn copy trunk
> branches/1.0.0-M1) and
> > finalize the release. This allows new development to
> > continue, even if release voting takes a while...).
> Does
> > require merging of changes, if updates are made to the
> > release branch. Since you don't really plan on
> > supporting the M1 branch, you can delete it after the
> > release vote passes...
> >
> > --kevan
