Yes, its a perfect use case for classifier. I just wish they'd use it... As Marco already pointed out, the Geronimo dependencies are much more useful than the API-only j2ee.jar file. I use them in all my J2EE projects.
Wayne On 1/24/08, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---- Stephen Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > > Don't use the borked j2ee.jar from the java.net or java.net2 maven > > repositories. > > > > I had the same problem. Basically, the j2ee.jar on the java.net repos is > > not a real jar, just stripped classes that have no method bodies, but just > > the method definitions. > > > > The borked jar is only good for compiling. I had an argument with the guy > > who posted it where I pointed out > > > "why-the-f*ck-would-you-want-a-jar-that-you-cannot-run-unit-tests-against-in-a-maven-repository" > > and he seemed to think that not running unit tests was a perfectly valid > use > > case and sure nobody using maven runs unit tests all the time, and sure > > could they not just compile and package the jar... > > > > He did not seem to get the whole lifecycle thing about maven2 at all > > Sigh. Thanks for trying Stephen.. > > Wouldn't this be a good case for a classifier? eg > <classifier>apionly</classifier> > > Then people who want this strange compile-but-not-run dependency can have > it... > > Regards, Simon > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
