FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development Java

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-13-2012, 01:06 AM
Andy Grimm
 
Default using systemPath in POM files

Hello, fellow java packagers. Little by little, I'm learning ways to
make life with maven a little easier. One of the things I recently
learned the quickest way to deal with a missing pom file. I was
packaging wss4j, which depends on axis, which doesn't have a pom file
in Fedora. I worked around it with this:

<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.axis</groupId>
<artifactId>axis</artifactId>
<version>${axis.version}</version>
- <scope>provided</scope>
+ <scope>system</scope>
+ <systemPath>${axis.basedir}/axis.jar</systemPath>
</dependency>
<dependency>

(where axis.basedir is set to /usr/share/java/axis). The solution
works fine, but is this acceptable? Is there a negative impact? It
seems my only other alternative would be to file a bug and wait for
the maintainer to add a pom to the axis package, and I'd rather not do
that. (I'm happy to file the bug, but not to wait for the fix).

Thanks,

Andy
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
 
Old 02-13-2012, 05:28 AM
Aleksandar Kurtakov
 
Default using systemPath in POM files

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy Grimm" <agrimm@gmail.com>
> To: "java-devel" <java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 4:06:29 AM
> Subject: [fedora-java] using systemPath in POM files
>
> Hello, fellow java packagers. Little by little, I'm learning ways to
> make life with maven a little easier. One of the things I recently
> learned the quickest way to deal with a missing pom file. I was
> packaging wss4j, which depends on axis, which doesn't have a pom file
> in Fedora. I worked around it with this:
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.apache.axis</groupId>
> <artifactId>axis</artifactId>
> <version>${axis.version}</version>
> - <scope>provided</scope>
> + <scope>system</scope>
> + <systemPath>${axis.basedir}/axis.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
>
> (where axis.basedir is set to /usr/share/java/axis). The solution
> works fine, but is this acceptable? Is there a negative impact? It
> seems my only other alternative would be to file a bug and wait for
> the maintainer to add a pom to the axis package, and I'd rather not
> do
> that. (I'm happy to file the bug, but not to wait for the fix).
>

Hi Andy,
The only negative impact I can see is for people not having ${axis.version} defined but assuming you define it in the same pom's properties section it should be fine. But still there are 2 more options - file a bug (with patch preferably) and wait for the maintainer or apply for commit rights and push the patch/build yourself. I'm pretty sure that in both cases you wouldn't have to wait much as the current maintainer is pretty active. I think that whenever someone needs modifications to some package it's better to become a co-maintainer so he/she can do other small tweaks if needed.

Regards,
Alex


> Thanks,
>
> Andy
> --
> java-devel mailing list
> java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
--
java-devel mailing list
java-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org