[rules-dev] GUVNOR-1809 and assembly issue

[Michael Anstis]

Whilst no expert in either the REST side of Guvnor or Maven or our builds,
I would elect having the integration test remove the section and have the
pom's include.

As a developer I would find it easier to follow the code rather than what
can appear as abstract maven configurations. But this could well be my lack
if clarity of some maven setups.

I also lean towards having the default (i.e. maven config) as full and
whittle it down elsewhere than having the default as minimal and add later.

I am sure others (Geoffrey) will have stronger opinions.

Appreciating your contributions.

Cheers,

Mike

sent on the move

On 20 Jun 2012 23:05, "Mikael Lönneberg" <emil at snickeboa.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thought I would get your input before I go any further on the task of
> creating the separate builds for the different target platforms.
> In switching to RESTeasy as the jax-rs framework this causes an issue
> RESTEASY-586 <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-586> when we
> deploy to AS7 as RESTeasy is already bundled/provided in AS7. So for all
> other platforms we need to include the resteasy-*.jar and for as7 they need
> to be removed. This is pretty straight forward.
> However we also need to add or remove this section
>
> <context-param>
>     <param-name>resteasy.injector.factory</param-name>
>     <param-value>org.jboss.resteasy.cdi.CdiInjectorFactory</param-value>
>   </context-param>
>
>  to guvnor-webapp-drools web.xml depending on the target platform, this is
> were it becomes a little tricky.
> What version should be checked in? Running in hosted mode requires the
> section to exist, running Arquillian integration-tests requires it to be
> removed, since integration-tests are run on as7.
>
> I'm leaning towards having the section included by default and remove it
> in GuvnorIntegrationTest or having the build process filter and create a
> new version per platform which can then be copied into the WebArchive in
> GuvnorIntegrationTest.
>
> What are your thoughts?
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Mikael Lönneberg (gwendo)
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20120620/e0f35d44/attachment.html