It works but the full client is not enough for us to be able to build our application.
Den 11 nov 2011 23:11 skrev "Ryan Connolly" <[email protected]>: > > Does this no longer work? > http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E12840_01/wls/docs103/client/t3.html > On Nov 11, 2011 3:38 PM, "Bengt Rodehav" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Stephen and Wayne, > > > > I agree that using system scope is undesirable. However, there is a reason > > why maven has had this support - it is needed in real life. In my case, I > > use Weblogic. When first trying to migrate our old ant based build system > > to maven, I started out by trying to put the Weblogic jar:s in the maven > > repo. It just wasn't doable. They have split the big, all encompassing, jar > > file from previous versions into hundreds of individual jar files. I gave > > up after a while. I guess if I could find a tool that could convert all > > these jars into one "super jar" then I could put that jar in the maven > > repo. I'm not sure that Oracle's licensing rules would allow it though. > > > > Dropping support like this because you don't think it's the best way to > > handle things will not give you a loyal user base. We need to solve these > > kind of issues somehow. Before you remove support you must provide an > > alternate solution. Requiring that hundreds of proprietary jars have to be > > put in the maven repo (and updated each time we upgrade Weblogic) is just > > not realistic. I've been searching for a good tool that can traverse the > > manifest classpath's and create a single jar from all individual jars. Do > > you know of any such tool? > > > > The transitive dependency problem is not exactly the way you describe it > > Stephen. I don't need transitive dependencies from a system scoped > > dependency but I want the transitive dependencies to work up to the system > > scoped dependency: > > > > If A depends on B that depends on S (via a system scoped dependency), then > > maven should be able to include S on A's build classpath. > > > > The way maven works right now I tend to agree that system scoped > > dependencies are useless. This is because their location must be hard coded > > in the POM. Naturally system scoped dependencies reside in different places > > in different environments. In our case it resides where the user has > > installed Weblogic. > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2011/11/11 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> > > > > > On 11 November 2011 16:31, Wayne Fay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> System scoped dependencies are dead. Ignore their zombie like walking > > > >> about. Stop fighting maven and just install the jars into a repo > > > > > > > > I agree, but shouldn't we kill system entirely at some point (I mean > > > > in the code) -- if we see a system-scoped dependency, we just fail the > > > > build with an appropriate error message? It is a dead concept IMO and > > > > is simply confusing to users who try to use it. > > > > > > Yes I agree... but lets get 3.0.4 out first ;-) > > > > > > To answer the OP > > > > > > Think of it like this, when you specify a "system" scope dependency > > > then you are stating that the system is responsible for providing that > > > dependency _and_ all its dependencies -> transitive stops at system > > > > > > Similarly, with provided scope, you are saying that somebody else is > > > taking care of providing that dependency at run time, and so therefore > > > maven doesn't have to worry about it or its dependencies. > > > > > > > > Wayne > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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] > > > > > > > >
