Can you reiterate why you need tomcat:exploded and tomcat:inplace
instead of just using the war:* goals?
This was probably discussed in the users list thread, but good to
elaborate here. I find it really helpful to see how you intend to use
the plugin, then look at how that would be implemented.
- Brett
Mark Hobson wrote:
> On 02/11/05, Kenney Westerhof <
kenney@...> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Mark Hobson wrote:
>>
>>Just some thoughts:
>>
>>The 'war' packaging _NEEDS_ a .war to be produced in case it will be used
>>in an ear. If you replace the war packaging by 'exploded', then there is
>>no artifact which will fail the install goal etc.
>
>
> This is true, but I guess the lifecycle would only be modified if the
> tomcat:exploded goal was present in the list of goals to execute -
> kinda smells of undeterministic behaviour though..
>
>
>>People want to test their webapps without running the war:war goal
>>since it is so slow. I can understand that.
>>
>>Perhaps a new lifecycle phase 'dev' or something, just before 'package',
>>might be useful in this case.
>
>
> Maybe a 'prepare-package' phase? I'm not sure how this would work
> with war:inplace though, since the results of this goal are mutually
> exclusive to the war:exploded and war:war goals.
>
>
>>Another way would be to optimize the WarMojo to update the .war instead of
>>recreating it each time. Then the war:war will always run, and you bind
>>war:exploded to the package phase too. This will eliminate the performance
>>penalty, I hope.
>
>
> This would certainly help, although tomcat:inplace still wouldn't be
> able to depend on war:inplace.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail:
dev-help@...
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
dev-help@...
