Oh yeah I agree you totally right on the name.
Yes, I found my way through the maze myself, and it didn't took too
long. It's also a pleasant situation : no more problem when releasing,
as we only have one single file to modify instead of many ! Thanks for that.
But I still think that UberMain is a bad name, and that it should not be
put in the installers subproject. Am I alone thinking this way ?
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Yeah this is a great approach.
> I don't think Emmanuel was aware since we might not have talked about
> it much. I think I stumbled on it myself at some point and was
> pleasantly surprised.
> I love how just having a dep on this serverxml jar and a line or two
> in the pom just dumps this server.xml where you want it. That rocks.
> David you make me go "I didn't know you can do that with Maven" quite
> The only thing that one can possibly find fault with is that if you
> change the server.xml you kind of have to install it's project it to
> have it dumped back that way. I barely notice this though.
> On Dec 17, 2007 5:46 PM, David Jencks < email@example.com> > www.iktek.com <http://www.iktek.com>> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > sorry for rehashing old things but :
> > There are a few things which could be changed and improved :
> > - the UberMain.java class could be renamed to Main.java. It's not
> > obvious to everyone that UberMain is the class which launch the
> > server...
> > - It has been moved to the installers package. It's fine for
> > installers, but I think it deserves to be put either in a specific
> > project like Server or Launcher
> > - We don't have anymore server.xml file anywhere _but_ in the
> > server-xml sub-project. Is this project the correct place for
> > storing the server configuration? Wouldn't it make more sense to
> > have this server.xml file close to the place we launch the server ?
> I think the server.xml is used in some integration tests run before
> UberMain is available. There used to be several copies of server.xml
> and the current solution at least reduces that to one copy that is at
> an easy to find place in the maven repo. What I want is:
> 1. only one copy of server.xml
> 2. accessible through maven for use for example in integration tests
> 3. independence from anything else (so by replacing it with a
> modified server.xml you don't affect anything else).
> The only way I know to get these is as a jar published to the maven
> david jencks
> > wdyt ?
> > --
> > --
> > cordialement, regards,
> > Emmanuel Lécharny
> > directory.apache.org < http://directory.apache.org>