[GLASSFISH-20102] Samples: Inspect projects with <packaging>pom</packaging> so their <modules> accurately reflects the intent Created: 29/Mar/13 Updated: 20/Dec/16 Resolved: 02/May/13
|Reporter:||Ed Burns||Assignee:||Snjezana Sevo-Zenzerovic|
|Remaining Estimate:||Not Specified|
|Time Spent:||Not Specified|
|Original Estimate:||Not Specified|
I have discovered one case where the <packaging>pom<packaging> that directs the flow of the build is missing entries in its <modules> section that apparently should be included.
This one instance is the jsf/pom.xml. I'll work with the engineers who contributed those samples to ensure they are wired up and do not break the build, but this brings to my attention the possibility for other instances of this problem.
I think a manual inspection is in order.
|Comment by Snjezana Sevo-Zenzerovic [ 02/Apr/13 ]|
This is more of a task than a bug, but I'll leave it as is so that it stays on the current dashboard. We do need to review sample application pom files, both for the correct module list and also for dependencies.
|Comment by shreedhar_ganapathy [ 19/Apr/13 ]|
Hi Snjezana, Ed
|Comment by Snjezana Sevo-Zenzerovic [ 24/Apr/13 ]|
I am planning to use this bug to cover overall review and sanity check on Java EE 7 samples workspace pom files. This will cover items such as dependency usage, hard-coded plugin and dependency versions and module list check.
|Comment by Snjezana Sevo-Zenzerovic [ 02/May/13 ]|
POM review has been completed. I checked in all trivial changes:
I also filed following issue to resolve questionable EJB sample gf-client dependency: