Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build Identifier: M20100818-0800 Check box option to assemble projects into WEB-INF/lib on New Assembly directive wizard is bit confusing Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: - create a web project and add it to EAR - Create a utility project (not part of EAR) - On web project | properties | Deployment assembly, we can add utility project (while adding a project we have an option to check if it should be part of WEB-IN/lib folder) - Add the utility project (not part of WEB-INF/lib, un-check the option) - Export the EAR and deploy to a RT - The jsp fails to resolve the reference from utility project FYI: In the WAR, the utility jar is dumped at the root. What is the use of not wanting the project/jar as part of WEB-INF/lib (and get dumped at the root of war file)?
The real question here is whether the add project reference wizard needs to have this checkbox at all. All it does it toggle between "WEB-INF/lib" and "/" as the initial deploy path. None of the other add wizards offer ability to influence deploy path right from the wizard. I propose that for consistency sake, this option be removed from the add project reference wizard. No functionality would be lost. The rare user that does want to map the jar somewhere other than WEB-INF/lib can make that selection in the deployment assembly page once the wizard completes.
Let's consider this for Indigo.
This is a good idea - less complication... removing an option nobody would ever want. - can you add a patch?
I also think it's a good suggestion. The deployment assembly page does all that's needed. The checkbox adds nothing.
Created attachment 181428 [details] Patch v1 Ignore the changes to java compiler settings in the project. I am using 3.7 M2 as my dev eclipse and practically every java ee tools project has optional java validation things flagged as errors. I will not be releasing these setting changes as part of this fix. It will need to be looked at separately.
I agree; the less complicated the better. Do you think this is also worth pulling back to WTP 3.2.3?
Released the patch to 3.3 M3 stream. > Do you think this is also worth pulling back to WTP 3.2.3? I am ambivalent on that. It's a fairly small improvement and being a UI change would require PMC approval... But it is perfectly safe and it is an improvement in usability. Let me know how you guys would like to go on this. I will back-port the patch (open a separate bug) if necessary.
Yes, could you please backport this for 3.2.3. Thanks.
