IIRC, the requirement is to put the xalan-2.7.0.jar in to the endorsed directory on the JDK specifically for use by uPortal. By putting that jar into that directory (which affects the entire JDK that's being used), I don't think this is necessarily just a Netbeans issue.
Is there a way to install this jar so that there is less of an impact to the entire JDK? For example, the endorsed/lib directory in Tomcat would be a good place since its on the classpath for all its own internal workings and web applications. And, this directory could easily be added to the classpath for the command line tools in build.xml. This would (theoretically) allow Netbeans to be used without changing the JDK. > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [uportal-dev] Xalan 2.70 and Netbeans > > Yes but this really seems more like a NetBeans issue than a uPortal > issue. You would be running into the same problem with any project that > needed to use Xalan 2.7 I'm assuming. Is there any chance of getting the > NetBeans developers to provide a solution? > > I'm still at +1 for releasing and just adding some documentation to the > release notes about known issues with this version of NetBeans on OS X. > > -Eric > > Andy Gherna wrote: > > At the same time though, not being able to work w/ uPortal on your tool > of > > choice is a limiting factor for some folks. > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Cris J Holdorph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 11:41 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [uportal-dev] Xalan 2.70 and Netbeans > >> > >> Hmm... I have to disagree with this. I'd also feel the same way about > >> Eclipse. We're trying to get 2.6.0 GA out the door. It's just my > >> opinion, but I don't believe any issues that are specific to an IDE > >> (Eclipse, Netbeans, Intellij, ...) should cause a delay in the release > >> at this point in the release process. > >> > >> ---- Cris J H > >> > >> Timothy Carroll wrote: > >> > >>> i agree to moving forward. however, i think a documented work-around > to > >>> this issue should accompany the ga release. > >>> > >> -- > >> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja- > >> sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev > >> > > > > > > -- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
