Matt and Mark,

I think I may have isolated the problem here (if not completely solved it).
Because the code works as advertised when running jetty:run-war (and
tomcat:run), it has to be something to do with the way packaging works for
the container that causes the problem. So, after looking at this page:

http://static.appfuse.org/appfuse-tapestry/dependencies.html

And comparing that with my pom, I noticed that I had scope="compile" for
tapestry-spring and scope="runtime" for tapestry-flash. Then it dawned on
me, I'd changed the scope for tapestry-spring in an earlier attempt to hunt
down this problem. What made me twig was the fact that the problem reported
by tapestry had *moved* from not knowing about "type='spring'", to not
knowing about "persist='flash'".

Changing the scope from "runtime" to "compile" time for both tapestry-spring
and tapestry-flash in the web/pom.xml allowed jetty:run to work. 

Wow, that took me a lot longer to work through than I had hoped, but at
least it's fixed. I can't say I know *why* changing the scope from runtime
to compile makes jetty:run work, but I'll leave that for another day.

Regards,
M@


Mark Rosenthal-2 wrote:
> 
> Outstanding, Matt!  I can continue development with frequent restarts, 
> but it'll be so much nicer to have directory scanning and 
> auto-reloading.  I'm new to the world of Maven, and find it somewhat 
> frustrating to not see what's going on under the covers.  In the 
> meantime, I'll give tomcat:run a go.
> 
> mraible wrote:
>> FWIW, I've posted this to the Tapestry users mailing list:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Problem-with-jetty%3Arun-when-using-Tapestry-4.1.3-tf4489399.html#a12805568
>>
>> Matt
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Problem-with-jetty%3Arun-in-Tapestry-basic-archetype-tf4485474s2369.html#a13870256
Sent from the AppFuse - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to