I'll start a vote thread on this then.

Thanks everyone!

On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 12:07 PM James Fredley <jamesfred...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Unlocking the ability to use it in grails-core is enough reason, from my
> perspective.
>
> Everything else is gravy.
>
> James Fredley
>
> On 2025/06/27 13:29:34 James Daugherty wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > The Grails Publish Plugin does not have any dependencies on Grails or our
> > code.  After seeing how many projects had disjointed & problematic
> > publishing, I modernized it so that it can be used to publish to maven,
> > nexus, or even maven central.  The purpose of this plugin was to simplify
> > publishing steps, including:
> >
> > 1. signing with a secring file
> > 2. signing with the local gpg command
> > 3. publication configuration
> > 4. dependency resolution issues in the pom
> > 5. supporting several artifact types, including:
> > - gradle plugin publishing
> > - java platform publishing
> > - java components
> > - test components
> > 6. environment variable driven configuration so a project can easily be
> > published to another location
> > 7. minimizing load on the target publish location when performing a
> release
> > 8. forced release detection instead of relying on a project version & the
> > project's conventions
> > 9. minimize signing tasks to only be performed upon a release
> >
> > Its code currently lives in the grails-gradle project under grails-core.
> > The issue with this is every project in grails-gradle then has to define
> > all of the publishing steps manually because the plugin cannot be used.
> I
> > could split it into yet another gradle subproject, but it seems to make
> > sense to publish this to its own location because:
> > 1. it needs a different release cadence than grails-core.
> > 2. it would allow us to publish our gradle plugins to the gradle plugin
> > portal.
> > 3. it is not dependent on any grails-core code / is a stand alone plugin
> >
> > Are people supportive of this subproject becoming its own repo?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James
> >
>

Reply via email to