On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 16:36, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > I think we need something more. Making it mandatory for the plugin to > > work would be better I think. > > Currently there is no real way to distinguish between a public property > and a private one even though in most cases they are almost always > public. > > I would be all for requiring some structure in the plugin.jelly or > project.xml that could be examined by the plugin plugin and not built > the plugin if the required structure is missing. > > You're right that the docs suck and this would be one way to try and > enforce it. If there are no public properties then that would have to be > explicity stated too. >
Having doco for properties is actually a more general problem as any Maven project requires this come to think of it. People may have properties for their particular build so maybe we could expand the project/properties to include optional descriptions and default values and we could easily generate doco for that. This obviously requires more work but may be a better solution in the long run and not really hard to implement. -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
