OK. I'll get the filter implemented ASAP. I should be able to finish
it over the weekend.
Matt Wringe wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 16:25 -0400, Stan Silvert wrote:
> Matt Wringe wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have the patched cactus ant jars and have also created an ant build
>> file that takes the hellojsf webapp and adds the jsfunit bits [I also
>> have a very small doc about how to use the ant with jsfunit].
>>
> Great. Will we still need a patch if we change to a Filter solution as
> I just described here?
>
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4046925#...
If we use the filter approach I don't think we will need any patches.
>> I have a couple of questions:
>> 1) where should the patched cactus jars go?
> If we need a patch for cactify I'll push a binary to the web site for
> download. But we won't check it into the main project unless the Cactus
> team refuses to do a release.
>
>> 2) I would like to get the ant example into svn, but I am a bit unsure
>> about a couple of things. Would it be ok to set it up like other ant
>> projects and put its dependency jars into svn? Or to set it up to use
>> the Maven tasks for ant so that dependencies and such come from the
>> maven repo? I currently have it setup as a bit of both (it grabs some of
>> the jars from the repo, but it won't download them if they are not in
>> the repo).
> Yes, we definitely want your ant example in the main project. I'd
> rather not have any dependent jars in SVN if we can help it. I don't
> think it adds any value to show developers how to set that part up.
>
> So I would prefer using the Maven tasks for ant to make dependencies
> come from the mave repo.
Yeah, I like that idea better, I never really liked the idea of having
jars in version control.
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Matt Wringe
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jsfunit-dev mailing list
>> jsfunit-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jsfunit-dev