"Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/10/2003 04:53:36 PM: [snip] > Agreed. In my opinion we should do both. We already started the plugin > move; we should finish it and not let it lie in mid-air. I shall be able > to help more in about 1-2 week's time now that my JUnit book is going to > press... (yeah :-). It's sooooo good when it's finished).
I've started it some. We just need a plan I think :-) [snip] > > They should declare it, if needed, using a dependency. Some of them > > already do. > > Yeah I thought about this, but... How is that going to work? 99.99% of > the plugin do not depend on the maven jar... Let's take an example; > let's imagine I want to say that the maven-cactus-plugin plugin only > works with Maven RC1 or later. How do I say that? How is it checked by > the Maven core so that Maven will say "Sorry, you need Maven xx or > greater for this plugin to work"? Yep, this and the JDK are a good example for this sort of behaviour. It's a runtime requirement rather than a dependency per-se. Not sure of the best way to solve this issue yet. > In addition, adding this declaration will download the maven jar which > is unnecessary for most plugins. It should be pre-populated in the repo as part of the install, as should all of maven and the shipped plugin dependencies. -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
