Hi, Sorry if it's the wrong thread, just let me know.
I thought I'd dump that thought I've had for some time here: was enriching a bit the <dependency> block already discussed? So that one can somehow express a <checksum> tag. I'm posting this here since this would also require a pom upgrade. I've re-read the recent threads but didn't find anything about it. Also crawled JIRA without luck (though I guess this has already been reported somewhere). Something like *<dependency>* * <groupId>...* * <artifactId>...* * <version>...* * <checksum>sha1:2cfc5458ff56d559316b901a348bbcad01d3ce62</checksum>* *</dependency>* WDYT? Cheers 2014-02-26 21:50 GMT+01:00 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I think this is good start and I would expect that the planned consumer > pom.xml would still validate against the model 4.0.0 xsd, since now it is > the standard file being uploaded and used by a lot of build management > tools. > If there are some flaws in the current XML, this could be the right moment > to design a new consumer specific XML, maybe together with the Aether team > for example. > > Robert > > Op Wed, 26 Feb 2014 01:59:29 +0100 schreef Stephen Connolly < > [email protected]>: > > > That is a modelVersion 4.0.0 consumer pom unless I am mistaken. What we/I >> want from a consumer pom is more than modelVersion 4.0.0 pom with >> inheritance interpolated and properties resolved >> >> On Tuesday, 25 February 2014, Jörg Hohwiller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi there, >>> >>> just for the record to this thread: >>> I wrote consumer-maven-plugin and added it to MOJOs sandbox. >>> The plugin allows to generate a consumer POM and apply it to the current >>> MavenProject (via setFile). >>> So we can already test various impacts of what can, will and should >>> happen >>> when a "consumer POM" is installed, signed, deployed instead of the >>> original pom.xml file that can later on be in future model formats. >>> >>> See thread on dev mojo with subject "consumer-maven-plugin added to >>> sandbox". >>> Hope to hear from you. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Jörg >>> >>> Am 24.11.2013 23:04, schrieb Barrie Treloar: >>> >>> On 25 November 2013 03:28, Stephen Connolly >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> [del] >>>> >>>> Given that we have decided that the reporting stuff possibly was a >>>>> mistake... Well let's drop that >>>>> >>>>> Given that profiles do not make sense in deployed poms... Drop them too >>>>> >>>>> We think <repositories> is evil... Let's drop that... We've dropped >>>>> build >>>>> and reporting=> no need for pluginRepositories at all so. >>>>> >>>>> I'm in favour of cleaning out elements that cause problems when they >>>> are tweaked in a the non-Maven Way. >>>> The emails to the users list would be reduce and there is less chance >>>> of causing confusion. >>>> >>>> Applying the "current" best practises and baking them into the poms is >>>> a good thing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net Sauvez un arbre, Mangez un castor !
