Alexander Sack wrote:
Thanks David, that's what I did. Its a little odd that you have duplicate
entries for the same dependency (btw, mvn shoots out warnings regarding
override scope, harmless I know, but still...).
Yes - it seems odd - thats what I thought at first - but now it actually
makes sense to me - scenario:
I have an application consisting of several artifacts:
1)
*commons stuff (client/server)
*server impl.
2)
*ejb
*mdb
*war
3)
1+2 into an ear
1) is plain pojo stuff and is running standalone some places - requiring
databasedrivers, JMS-messaging drivers etc.
3) is suitable to run in an container - which typically _provide_ the
driver stuff ++ - which we deploy somewhere else.
so it makes sense to be provided in the ear package.
I started out declaring drivers and stuff provided in the server - but
this was in fact incorrect - the environment (a plain JDK) did not
provide this, so I turned it around, making them compile scoped (which,
really, is the correct) - and making them optional in the ear.
Wonder how long big fat $$ non-agile containers will live :-)
--
David J. M. Karlsen - +47 90 68 22 43
http://www.davidkarlsen.com
http://mp3.davidkarlsen.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
