Standalone Jelly without Maven

["Thakkar, Hetal" <he...@citigroup.com>]

I am trying to use Jelly for a data generation application that does not require Maven. I can run standalone (without Maven) Jelly through a Java class as follows:

    JellyContext context = new JellyContext();
    context.runScript( resolveURL("script.xml"));

Are there any short comings of using Jelly this way as opposed to using it in conjunction with Maven?

Thanks,
Hetal

Re: Standalone Jelly without Maven

["Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>]

Hetal,

I've been using Jelly to do batch processing of simulations. Both to 
generate the resulting data files and to configure the simulation before 
its run. I have no complaints, it seems very stable, I've run batch 
processing that was rather time consuming ( > 12 hrs. ) and never 
encountered any memory problems or any leaking of any kind. I think its 
a very solid tool.

-Mark Diggory
http://repast-jellytag.sourceoforge.net

Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Thakkar, Hetal wrote:
> 
>> I am trying to use Jelly for a data generation application that does 
>> not require Maven. I can run standalone (without Maven) Jelly through 
>> a Java class as follows:
>>
>>     JellyContext context = new JellyContext();
>>     context.runScript( resolveURL("script.xml"));
>>
>> Are there any short comings of using Jelly this way as opposed to 
>> using it in conjunction with Maven?
> 
> 
> Hetal,
> 
> I don't think there's any shortcomings except the obvious fact that you 
> have to master the classpath yourself...
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 

Re: Standalone Jelly without Maven

[Paul Libbrecht <pa...@activemath.org>]

Thakkar, Hetal wrote:
> I am trying to use Jelly for a data generation application that does not require Maven. I can run standalone (without Maven) Jelly through a Java class as follows:
> 
>     JellyContext context = new JellyContext();
>     context.runScript( resolveURL("script.xml"));
> 
> Are there any short comings of using Jelly this way as opposed to using it in conjunction with Maven?

Hetal,

I don't think there's any shortcomings except the obvious fact that you 
have to master the classpath yourself...

Paul