<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
During the Archetypes tests I had problem building the Enterprise
version because BOMs 1.0.4.Final-redhat-wfk-1 wasn't released yet. <br>
<br>
We had similar problem like the one opened by Max Andersen on
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JDF-230">https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JDF-230</a> - I'm adding him to this
thread.<br>
<br>
Shouldn't in this case use the BOM from WFK 2.1
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/wfk2/2.1.0/maven-repository/com/redhat/jboss/wfk/boms/jboss-javaee-6.0-with-errai/">http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/wfk2/2.1.0/maven-repository/com/redhat/jboss/wfk/boms/jboss-javaee-6.0-with-errai/</a>
? - But that would cause another problem with the actual archetypes
because the groupId was changed from org.jboss.bom to
com.redhat.jboss.wfk.boms - The archetype bom references
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/rafabene/jboss-as-archetype/blob/3d9a6f3d9313515354b7418d20561f21c5f79b46/jboss-javaee6-webapp-archetype/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml#L93-L97">https://github.com/rafabene/jboss-as-archetype/blob/3d9a6f3d9313515354b7418d20561f21c5f79b46/jboss-javaee6-webapp-archetype/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml#L93-L97</a><br>
<br>
<br>
I think that we'll need to keep EAP bom '1.0.2.Final-redhat-1' like
described on JDF-230 and them think a little bit more on how to have
these archetypes aligned to WFK.<br>
<br>
<br>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Em 18/04/13 09:57, Rafael Benevides
escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:516FEDBF.2020107@redhat.com" type="cite">Makes
sense! I'll update the PR.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Em 18/04/13 09:13, Pete Muir escreveu:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Right, that one is WFK, so it should track
WFK.
<br>
<br>
On 18 Apr 2013, at 04:09, Karel Piwko <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kpiwko@redhat.com"><kpiwko@redhat.com></a>
wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">My understanding of the situation was
the archetype contains it its metadata
<br>
line [1]:
<br>
<br>
Target Product: WFK
<br>
<br>
Therefore, archetype should take precedence of WFK BOM version
over EAP BOM
<br>
version if it exists for particular BOM.
<br>
<br>
So BOM version will differ per archetype. Sometimes, we'll
even have two
<br>
versions, as products do no distribute all BOM set anymore.
<br>
<br>
Karel
<br>
<br>
[1]
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/rafabene/jboss-as-archetype/blob/3d9a6f3d9313515354b7418d20561f21c5f79b46/jboss-html5-mobile-archetype/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/README.md">https://github.com/rafabene/jboss-as-archetype/blob/3d9a6f3d9313515354b7418d20561f21c5f79b46/jboss-html5-mobile-archetype/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/README.md</a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:28:44 -0300
<br>
Rafael Benevides <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:benevides@redhat.com"><benevides@redhat.com></a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Today Karel made a comment on a
Archetype PR that needs an answer:
<br>
<br>
The Archetypes uses the 1.0.2.Final-redhat-1 version to as
the
<br>
"jboss-bom-enterprise-version" from EAP
<br>
<br>
But Karel asked if shouldn't it use 1.0.4.Final-redhat-wfk-1
from WFK?
<br>
<br>
What it the supposed version for
"jboss-bom-enterprise-version" in
<br>
Archetypes ?
<br>
<br>
Thanks
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>