maven-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net>
Subject Re: A wsdl file as an artifact
Date Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:03:25 GMT
I don't necessarily want a jar. I'm just wondering if anyone have run into
issues using either one of the approaches. I'm thinking about classpaths,
plugins etc.

The packaging type is metadata and should be correct. For the this project
the wsdl file is the primary artifact, but if the packing says 'pom' we're
saying that the pom is the artifact. It's not a major issue, but could cause
some problems for tools using the metadata (like a repo manager).

How do you handle your schemas. Do the artifact's version follow the version
of the schema?

/Anders
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 14:54, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Anders,
>
> Anders Hammar wrote:
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jörg's approach is what I was thinking of. The only drawback is
> > bad/incorrect metadata (pom packaging). That could be fixed though.
> > The nice thing is that this would also work great with a ws registry
> > containing wsdl files, which could quite easily be proxied by a repo
> > manager as a maven repo.
> >
> > Any drawback not packing it as a jar that someone could think of?
>
> Why do you need a jar? With packaging pom you will have a pom and a wsdl in
> repository afterwards. The packaging is more of interest for automated
> classpath processing.
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message