On 10/5/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: > > So the options we have are: > > 4) Another option is to simply remove the poms and to not declare the > local stage folder as a maven repository in the main pom.xml. > This way our internal "maven based" procedures will need to be online, > but everything else is ok. > > I refactored the lib folder to "stage" structure some weeks ago to have > a self contained build for maven and to have a common structure in our > product source folders and I saw no drawbacks at that time but having > found this "licensing" issue with poms we could even evaluate reverting > it (even if I still prefer #4 and #3 to #1, #2 or revert to lib folder).
this sounds good to me anyone else have any strong opinions? - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
