what I prefer to do is have developers use an on-demand servlet container, e.g. jetty or tomcat and then configure web.xml overrides for the app when deployed using e.g. jetty:run or tomcat:run
but YMMV On 27 May 2013 16:58, Russell Gold <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe this is quite reasonable. Developers would like to be able to > see a lot of reports on the code internals. The ability to generate those > is one of Maven's strengths; however, users (which I assume is meant by > production) should generally not be given all that information, especially > if the project is not open source. > > And it's not all that hard to do this is Maven. > > The maven-site-plugin stage, deploy, and stage-deploy goals all support > the property: siteDirectory. By default, this is ${basedir}src/site. You > could explicitly configure the plugin to use a property and have different > profiles supply different values that point to two different directories. > You would also need to use a property to specify your site deployment url, > of course, and have the profiles define those appropriately. > > Russ > > On May 27, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Wayne Fay <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I have two different web.xml files. One for Developers and another for > >> Production. > > > > Why? What specifically is different? Can those differences not be > > eliminated, to produce one single artifact for all environments? > > > > Wayne > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > ----------------- > Come read my webnovel, Take a Lemon <http://www.takealemon.com>, > and listen to the Misfile radio play < > http://www.gold-family.us/audio/misfile.html>! > > > > >
