Sorry for chiming in again but perhaps I might have an idea. The XSD schema
that a POM uses is actually referenced from the POM. So in essence each POM
carries with it what is needed to know to parse it. Perhaps in Maven 5 (or
whichever version) we can require POM parsers to read and use the specific XSD
schema referenced in the POM. That way you can have more room to try changes
to the POM format. But there really should be a mechanism for pushing POM
changes downstream and XSD seems like a good option for that. Sorry if this is
already the plan and I'm repeating what is already known.
Hunter
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 11:12:39 PM PDT, Hervé Boutemy
<herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote:
Le lundi 12 juin 2023, 01:50:56 CEST Guillaume Nodet a écrit :
> > Don't look at Maven code to judge: the whole logic is based on "known
> > unknown"
> > = we don't know who parses POMs published to Maven Central, but there are
> > many
> > (it's easy to cite many, but not all).
>
> I can't buy that argument. You're saying that we should not assume the way
> the POM is parsed, but we assume they don't parse arguments. That's
> clearly dodgy, and false for our own parser (both are parsed and rejected
> in strict mode and silently ignored in lenient mode).
I can understand that it does not match the precision of your logic based on
todays code: did you look at Maven 2 code? did you look at every other
consumer of Maven Central content?
whatever you feel about it today, that's what has been defined and done for now
more than 15 years, and proven working, and AFAIK checked when publishing to
Maven Central
If we change that, we are changing the Maven Central contract for everybody
from the past and future
Maven 5 is not only about Maven: it's also about Maven Central, which is the
hardest piece to make sure we don't break usage
Regards,
Hervé
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
