|Re: Static Weaving through Eclipse Plug-in [message #538564 is a reply to message #538313]
||Tue, 08 June 2010 00:57
| Ari Meyer
Registered: July 2009
I use Maven and Eclipse (and the Maven Eclipse plugin) as well. I set
up a launch config in Eclipse to execute static weaving on demand, and
here it is as exported:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
value="-loglevel FINEST -persistenceinfo src/main/resources
You can replace the "***PROJECT***" placeholders with your Eclipse
project name and then import that launch config, if you'd like. Notice
the MAIN_TYPE and PROGRAM_ARGUMENTS. As long as the eclipselink JAR is
in your Build Path, this should work for you.
Also, here's the relevant part of my Maven config (including an
alternate, commented-out version):
classname=" org.eclipse.persistence.tools.weaving.jpa.StaticWeaveAntTask "
line="-loglevel FINEST -persistenceinfo
src/main/resources target/classes target/classes"/>
and here's where I originally got it from:
> Hi Shaun,
> first of all thanks for your answer. Indeed, dynamic weaving is the
> preferable option - however, not applicable for JUnit Testing as well as
> deployments to Tomcat (which is our current deployment target).
> I played around with integrating the ant task in our Eclipse build, but
> with limited success. This may be due to our "special" dev config. We
> use Maven (and the Maven Eclipsep plug-in) for dependency management as
> well as for packaging the application. Regular builds during development
> are done in Eclipse. However, due to using Maven our dependencies are
> kept outside from the application path during development (in the maven
> user repo). Using the ant task I experienced that these dependencies
> cannot be accessed without setting an absolute classpath for every
> developer (or duplicating the jars within the application path).
> Therefore, I stopped investigating a solution relying on the Ant task.
> If there is an option to do so, I would appreciate any hints.
> In the meantime I will file an RFE for Dali as you proposed.
> Thanks, marco
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01986 seconds