> These below should go as well. The coupling on the license 
> plugin needs to be removed, multiproject certainly isn't 
> core, and neither is plugin.
> 
> > - license
> > - multiproject
> > - touchstone
> > - touchstone-partner
> > - plugin

Isn't touchstone needed to test the maven code though? The touchstone
plugins don't test other plugins at all, just behaviour of the plugin
manager from what I can tell.

> The touchstone could probably even go. I'm going to out a 
> proposal where the names of goals are done in such a way that 
> we follow the once established convention of 
> <plugin>:<action> (e.g. jar:build). With this the goal is 
> linked to it's plugin explicity. It would be easy to detect 
> whether the plugin for that goal is present so it could be 
> downloaded and this method would scale to any number of 
> plugins. I'll whip it off tomorrow it's only a few paragraphs.

Yep - I've thought of doing the same. As discussed on the list a while back
though, you'd need to be able to say:
maven:jar:build (plugin-groupId:plugin-artifactId:goal) to fix namespace
issues.

> Then this list above will be moot as it won't matter where 
> the plugins are. Also a testing method that is not bound to 
> the bootstrap is necessary so that we and others can test 
> plugins correctly against any number of desired versions not 
> just CVS HEAD.


This testing method is already in place for some plugins (the plugin-test
project). More needed, and whatever is plugin specific in the touchstone
needs to be moved. I mentioned this earlier.

Cheers,
Brett

Reply via email to