Goals aren't generally reused to do different things, jelly tags/ant tasks are. A goal is generally written as a thin wrapper round a jelly tag or ant task which does the real work. The goal's job is to supply the project parameters for this job. A good example of this is the artifact plugin, which provides no goals at all, just reusable tags for installing and deploying artifacts to maven repositories.
There is some support for declaring the 'main' artifact type of a project (eg jar,war,ear...) for use with the reactor and multiproject plugin, see 'maven.multiproject.type' here:
http://maven.apache.org/reference/plugins/multiproject/properties.html
In the case of SAR files, up to now people have been building these by writing their own goals in maven.xml. See:
http://wiki.codehaus.org/maven/BuildingJbossWithMaven
for examples of this.
Brian Towles wrote:
Does anyone have any ideas about this. It comes into play with the depenencies thread and typing that is going on as well.
-=Brian
On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 10:48, Brian Towles wrote:
Howdy all
Im coming on a care more and more where a jar file has a different suffix instead of jar in order for it to be recognised as a certain type of deployment.
For example JBoss uses .sar for JMX deployment and .wsr for Web Services deployment.
What would the desgin goal be here? They are really simple jars with
only a deployment descriptor in the META-INF to make em different. Should the maven jar plugin simply be modified to allow for an alternate
suffix? (simple patch) Or would if be preferable for a diffenrent plugin
to be created for each (such as ear and war).
The issue, I guess is that the deployment descriptor for each type is not something that is easily autogenerated (unlike the ear application.xml)
Ideas?
Thanks -=Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
