>
> but that's it's weakness as well. the build breaks if the repositories are
> for some reason not available and the libs are not cached locally already.
>
A solution would be to run an own maven repository with the needed
dependencies. I think I saw some project hosting its maven repository at
> Question : for your daily developments, do you use and
> test OpenJUMP after a compilation made from ant, from mvn or another way ?
daily: using eclipse (so its neither nor, as it is a eclipse built-in thing)
for release: I used ant
for the different jars:
well, as you are doing the builds sin
On 07.01.2012 14:05, Benjamin Gudehus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some words to the libraries: I personally prefer the maven build. The ant
> build is used for release builds and the maven build for the nightly snapshot.
we should for sure consider to retire one of them. double administration means
double
Hi,
some words to the libraries: I personally prefer the maven build. The ant
build is used for release builds and the maven build for the nightly
snapshot. I really like about the maven build that the filenames of the
jars are more readable and that it is not necessary to bundle the jars in
the r
On 07.01.2012 10:01, Michaël Michaud wrote:
> Hi Ede, Stefan,
>
> Some notes and questions about packaging/releasing
>
> I'm comparing the ant build with the NB maven results and noticed some
> differences :
>
> *ant build*
> - includes all jar and dll of plus distribution
> * I will make a c
Hi Ede, Stefan,
Some notes and questions about packaging/releasing
I'm comparing the ant build with the NB maven results and noticed some
differences :
*ant build*
- includes all jar and dll of plus distribution
* I will make a core distribution by hand and update the build to
have choice
