>> A better change would be to support nested dependencies, but this
>> would require both a change to the framework Info.plist (to declare
>> dependent framework names), embedding (to include nested
>> dependencies), and the code that constructs the runtime classpath
>> (or a change to WOBoostrap to load nested automatically rather than
>> declare them in the macosxclasspath file).
>
> Wouldn't it be easier if we use a dependency management tool like Ivy?
For some definitions of "easier" I guess ... Ivy is only jar-based,
right? Which would require jar-based frameworks, but jar-based
frameworks don't support nested jars. Q has a WOBootstrap that does,
but we're still talking about changing the way a large number of
people deploy their apps. Not to mention we have to then integrate
Ivy with WOLips, not to mention it has to work in Eclipse also. That
and I'm not even really sold on jar frameworks, though the better
split install build.xml makes it slightly better I guess. I still
come back to "make it easy for people" .... Ivy's certainly an option,
and I'm not at all ruling it out, but I'm always sort of skeptical of
the final result of these things actually being a better experience
for endusers of the system.
ms
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Nov 07 2008 - 09:17:42 EST