OK point taken. How does this sound: - refactor the jar portion of the ejbjar task into spawning 1 jar task for each jar to be produced - pass the jar-related portions of the ejbjar task down into each jar task - execute the lot
Just adding the manifest to ejbjar directly would work, but it feels like cutting corners to me ... just my $.02 > -----Original Message----- > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 25, 2003 7:21 PM > To: Ant Users List > Subject: Re: Manifest.mf > > > On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:19 am, Rob van Oostrum wrote: > > Any reason why <ejbjar> doesn't inherit from <jar>? Wouldn't it > make sense > > to refactor this one? After all, an EJB jar is just another jar > that just > > so happens to contain a specific category of files in a > specific structure. > > > > Any strong feelings on this out there? > > There are two reasons why ejbjar does not extend jar. One is due > to history - > the ejbjar task was not limited to JDK 1.1 and could make use of the jar > related classes in the JDK. The other, more fundamental reason, is that > ejbjar is really quite different from jar :-) Whereas jar is > about producing > a single jar from a set of specified contents, ejbjar is capable > of producing > multiple jars in a single bound and processing them with vendor specific > tools. The EJB jar contents are determined from deployment > descriptors and > various naming conventions are used to bring different pieces together. > > One of the reasons there is no <manifest> element is that > manifests can be > picked up per EJB-jar based on the naming scheme. That said, a <manifest> > element could be added. > > Conor > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
