Anyone have any ideas or willing to assist with patches? It'd be nice
to have this complete for AR2.
Cheers,
Peter.
Dennis Reedy (JIRA) wrote:
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-317?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12760243#action_12760243 ]
Dennis Reedy commented on RIVER-317:
------------------------------------
I dont see how the -dl.jar files are being handled with this approach. How will the -dl.jar files for reggie, outrigger, mahalo (etc...) be defined? With River services we have multiple artifacts per service, an implementation jar, a download (client) jar and potentially a service ui jar.
I suggest that we need to be thinking of adding classifiers for the artifacts,
allowing dependencies to be resolved correctly. For example, if I am using
Outrigger, I need to be able to start Outrigger using outrigger.jar and
outrigger-dl.jar, but my client (the one who uses Outrigger) needs to only have
outigger-dl.jar in it's classpath not outrigger.jar.
Declaring dependencies on River produced maven artifacts need to account for how a maven project will use the artifacts.
Deploy Apache River artifacts to Maven repositories (both release and snapshot)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: RIVER-317
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-317
Project: River
Issue Type: Task
Components: Web site and infrastructure
Affects Versions: AR2, AR3
Reporter: Jeff Ramsdale
Fix For: AR2
Attachments: river-poms.patch
It would be valuable if Apache River artifacts were deployed to a Maven
repository upon release. It would be even better if snapshot builds were also
deployed to a snapshot repository by Hudson.
See thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-river-dev/200908.mbox/<[email protected]>
