Would it make sense to create a new dependency type for J2EE client applications (eg. 'client-jar'), and only have those dependencies end up with a <module> in the application.xml (with jar dependencies still being bundled in the ear, but without any mention in application.xml)?
Or would it be better to add a property for dependencies that specifies if it is a J2EE client application, and only then is the <module> created. This would be much like the existing ear.bundle property is used to decide which jars go in the ear. Or is there a better way to do this? Any thoughts appreciated... Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Lewis-Shell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Maven Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 9:37 AM Subject: EAR plugin: application.xml generation without java <module> > Hi, > > I am wanting maven to produce an ear file that contains the ear.bundle=true > dependent jars, but withOUT the maven generated application.xml containing a > <module> definition for those jars. Is this possible? > > From my cursory reading of the J2EE spec, a java type <module> is for a J2EE > client application, rather than for a supporting jar (eg. log4j-1.2.8.jar), > and I am finding WebSphere won't deploy these maven generated ear files. > > Thanks, > > Richard > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
