Rico Landefeld wrote: > I don't know how this is supposed to work. I removed the Ant task which > creates the lib directory because I've thought that this is handled in the > parent POM like the rest of the PEAR packaging, but this is not the case. > Right - though that sounds like a good candidate for factoring into a higher level of the parent pom chain, after we do several without this factoring to see better understand exactly what the implications are.
> Should I provide a patch which re includes the lib directory creation and > the missing google-collection entry in the notice file? > Yes please :-) -Marshall > Rico > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> At one point the Lucas POM copied all of the dependency Jars into a lib/ >> directory, which was later part of the pear build input (and therefore, >> subsequently "distributed"). But at the moment, the PEAR has nothing in >> it besides the core Lucas annotator. >> >> The POM plugin that did this was removed in change 811314 ( >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-1535 applying Rico's patch) >> >> How is this supposed to work? Are we not shipping its dependencies? >> The Notice file does mention google collections... as if we are shipping >> that. >> >> The above Jira issue includes the comment "This patch seems to have done >> a little too much clean-up. The lib directory of the pear file is now >> empty. When I go back to Joern's latest revision, the pear looks ok >> (though I did not install and run it)." - so this issue has been noticed >> before, but the Jira was closed. >> >> I think it's broken and won't work, without the dependencies in the lib. >> >> -Marshall >> >> > >
