Support the WAR lifecycle

[jvanzyl]

Currently there is no support for producing WAR files. This is probably not completely straight forward but if enough people ask for it we'll consider implementing it.

[theit]

+1 for WAR support

[vmassol]

+1, Servlet app are still quite common nowadays :) (and if we want to use Takari on XWiki's build we'll need that support)

[reckart]

As long as I can have takari-lifecycle projects as dependencies of WAR modules in Eclipse, I'd probably be ok with not having the WAR module itself using the life-cycle. Just making some first steps towards switching to the new lifecycle so far, so no really formed opinion yet. Not even sure yet whether the takari-lifecycle actually speeds up anything for m2e projects in Eclipse, since Eclipse already comes with incremental compile.

[jeffjensen]

What is the probable improvement impact? Improvement only if the Java code is in the WAR module? Since my WAR modules simply assemble jars into lib, loose non-compiled files, and a handful of Spring config .java -> .class files into archive, without intimate details, I wonder that the largest improvement is with assembly plugin or the Java jar program in this case.

[jvanzyl]

People have some questions so I'll write something up about the benefits and why you might want to use the Takari Lifecycle for WAR projects.

[javapapo]

+1 for the issue

[mosabua]

Definitely interested as well. So +1 or more from me ;-)

[goldenice]

+1

[Rebzie]

+1

[goldenice]

What is the status on this? Is it actually up for implementation, or are there too few votes to be considered?

[jvanzyl]

I plan to implement it but it likely won't be until August at the very least.

[barbarello]

+1 as well

[ydirickson]

It would be awesome, +1 for WAR packaging.

[louislepper]

+1

[s4gh]

+1

[jakub-bochenski]

@jvanzyl it would be awesome to see this implemented or get the writeup "about the benefits and why you might want to use the Takari Lifecycle for WAR projects."