Well, that SCDL fragment is wrong (wrong namespaces, wrong elements)
but the basic path is
${root}/${groupWithSlashesForDots}/${name}/${version}/${name}-$
{version}[-${classifier}].${type}
where ${root} is the property of the extension resolved relative to $
{user.home}
so for what you have in your scdl:
~/.m2/repository/axis2/axis2-core/SNAPSHOT/axis2-core-SNAPSHOT.jar
See https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/
kernel/core/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/core/services/artifact/
LocalMavenRepository.java
--
Jeremy
On Oct 11, 2006, at 3:35 PM, Simon Nash wrote:
Jeremy,
I'm sorry that I need to reply to your question with a question.
This is because I can't answer your question until I'm clear on
the following.
How does the simple scheme work today? For example, the SCDL in the
helloworldwsclient standalone jar has the following:
<tuscany:dependency>
<group>axis2</group>
<artifact>axis2-core</artifact>
<version>SNAPSHOT</version>
</tuscany:dependency>
How does the standalone environment currently translate this group,
artifact and version information into the name and location of the
dependency artifact that it will load?
Simon
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Depends on the repo.
In the webapp we have a maven based repo implementation that
supports transitive deps based on maven metadata in the artifact
or in an accompanying pom (at least, I think this is what
Meeraj's thing does).
In the standalone env we are currently using a simpler repo that
does not support transitive deps or remote downloads. Promoting
to do that should just be a matter of changing the repo impl to
the same maven one as used in the webapp.
Should we do that?
--
Jeremy
On Oct 11, 2006, at 11:19 AM, Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi, Jeremy.
For the following XML fragment in the default.scdl for
binding.axis2,
<dependency xmlns="http://tuscany.apache.org/xmlns/1.0-SNAPSHOT";>
<group>axis2</group>
<name>axis2-kernel</name>
<version>SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
Is it transitive? For example, axis2 has dependencies on wsdl4j
and XmlSchema. Would these artifacts be resolvable at runtime
without explicit declarations?
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Simon C Nash IBM Distinguished Engineer
Hursley Park, Winchester, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
