Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

[Kathryn Huxtable <>]

Michael, I'm with you completely on this. It's easy to make it  
generate a jar, so I'll do that.

As a Maven2 user, I prefer separate jars for separate deployables.

As you know, we don't use Maven in the I2 projects and I'm not  
invested enough to take on that battle, but the principles still apply.

-K

On Apr 2, 2008, at 1:14 PM, Michael R. Gettes wrote:
> Kathryn, as you know, I have long been frustrated by the
> "deployment design" of LDAPPC.  ANYTHING you can do to simplify
> it and have it actually make sense is a good thing!  But, please,
> don't redo the mistake in grouper 120 (i think that was the version)
> where jars like subject-api got rolled into a larger jar file making
> it impossible to try different versions (or test versions) of various
> jar files as part of the development process for creating a service.
> I guess a shorter way of saying this might - please also retain
> the flexibility.
>
> I hope this helps!
>
> /mrg
>
> On Apr 2, 2008, at 14:09, Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
> > Is there any interest in having the build process for ldappc  
> > generate a jar, so that can easily be run from a simple directory  
> > with the grouper-api, signet-api, and other assorted jars?
> >
> > Currently, it just generates a class directory.
> >
> > -K