On May 21, 2005, at 7:31 AM, Felipe Leme wrote:
On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 15:16 +1000, Brett Porter wrote:
This is a bit out of context. What I haven't seen a reason for is why
WEB-INF/classes should be packaged as a JAR in lib instead, and what
that benefits you.
Ok, I see your point - I guess it's more of a personal preference.
Anyway, the same argument could apply against the current way: why
should the classes be on WEB-INF/classes instead of a jar?
Servlet spec 2.4 says this (section 9.5):
• The/WEB-INF/classes/ directory for servlet and utility classes. The
classes in this directory must be available to the application class
loader.
• The/WEB-INF/lib/*.jar area for Java ARchivefiles. These files contain
servlets, beans, and other utility classes useful to the Web
application. The Web application class loader must be able to load
classes from any of these archive files.
The Web application classloader must load classes from the
WEB-INF/classes directory first, and then from library JARs in the
WEB-INF/lib directory. ...
-------------
I conclude from this that the WEB-INF/classes area is the primary area
you are expected to put your classes in, and WEB-INF/lib is a secondary
area for other stuff you scrounged up from somewhere else. In
particular they are not equivalent, since the WEB-INF/classes area is
first on the classloader path. Putting everything in WEB-INF/lib
removes the possibility of overriding classes with this mechanism.
From this I think the most reasonable behavior for maven is to only put
java classes from the current project in WEB-INF/classes and to require
putting the java in a separate project if you want them in a jar in
WEB-INF/lib.
thanks
david jencks
<giant snip>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
