commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Libbrecht <p...@activemath.org>
Subject Re: Jelly Status
Date Sun, 29 Jun 2003 21:48:36 GMT
I agree the installation (and running) is painful, I've been thinking of 
a Webstart-based jelly-launcher which would help greatly, I think but 
had no time doing it.

In the meantime, I think a usable approach is to use directly maven to 
run jelly: for each jelly file, you have a project.xml (probably pretty 
dumb, but stating dependencies!), a maven.xml doing all you want... and 
probably some related files...

As of the non-up-to-date of the maven repository, I think it's simple 
enough to use maven to build the tag-libs you want (source from 
repository) and build so far as the plug-in is installed in your repository.

Might I recommend, however, that a distribution of jelly is made 
somewhere that contains most of the tag-libs ? At least those having 
dependencies that can be honoured by ibiblio ?

Certainly, the jelly development, however, would enjoy some responsible 
for the taglibs or a fair amount of them. I am not the influencer or 
decider but it really looks like it's needed.

Paul


Ken McCloskey wrote:
> I'm quite eager to use Jelly, but I find the installation to be 
> difficult and the documentation to be thin and unhelpful. One of the 
> reasons I believe Ant has been so successful is that you can download 
> it, install it, and use it in a matter of minutes. No lost time, no 
> frustration.
> 
> Many of the dependencies required to build Jelly are not on ibiblio, for 
> example.
> 
> Before I invest any more time into it, I'd like to know whether there is 
> still a serious ongoing development effort in Jelly.
> 
> Ken




Mime
View raw message