Am 02.09.2016 um 13:48 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> I found all of these need intervention for building, as there is no
> "install" target (maybe I missed something). Echo of the packages
> behaves a bit different (e.g. different directory names), while
> sharing some common patterns. I'll attach my WIP for your convenience.
“ant-build-system” creates a “build.xml” with an install target when
“#:jar-name” is provided.  This is useful in case there’s only a
“pom.xml” and the package provides a single jar.

 Yes, this is what you wrote earlier today. But most of these (four) commons packages habe a build.xml, But they behave differently. Some build into "target", some into "dist/", some put docs in "apidocs/" others into "docs/api/".

Or do you suggest to use a build.xml created be ant-build-system?


--
Schönen Gruß
Hartmut Goebel
Dipl.-Informatiker (univ), CISSP, CSSLP, ISO 27001 Lead Implementer
Information Security Management, Security Governance, Secure Software Development

Goebel Consult, Landshut
http://www.goebel-consult.de

Blog: http://www.goebel-consult.de/blog/fortbildung-iso-27001-lead-implementer
Kolumne: http://www.cissp-gefluester.de/2010-09-mut-zur-beschraenkung