I have a question to the old phases in CLI. I will use the phase "post-site" in my examples. $ mvn post-site
What did we expect from "post-site" and why we supported it in CLI? >From my point of view, it is a bad use. I used it as well because I expected Maven to run "post-site" after $ mvn site Since my POM complicated and neede to perform some postprocessing of the project page (Site), I used "post-site" in my plugins in my POM. Due to the "post-site" was not triggered after "site" by the Maven ($ mvn site), I had to force the whole lifecycle to run the build until the end, means "post-site". I was not in Maven 15 years ago, but I think the "post-???" phases were dedicated to POM and not in CLI. The thing that Maven works as it works, I considered the behavior as a bug but I could not do anything about it and tried to workaround it in CLI. So, altogether including this new feature means that we can frely remove all post phases from CLI because they will run anyway when the main phases are used in CLI. On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 12:13 AM Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 22:48, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote: > > > I am referring to this sentence: > > "The logic of using : in these prefix names is that it would expressly > be > > impossible to invoke these dynamic pseudo phases from the CLI as Maven > will > > interpret any attempt to invoke them as $plugin:$goal and look for a > > maven-before-plugin or maven-after-plugin". > > > > We can put specific checks in to give friendly error messages, but > fundamentally Maven will treat a CLI argument with one colon as a plugin > goal to execute separate from the lifecycle > > We want the before and after phases to not be directly invoked via CLI or > invoker, and because you cannot have a phase with this name, it’s safe to > reuse > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 11:13 PM Stephen Connolly < > > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 21:41, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> > > wrote: > > > > > > > The fixed phases were one of the main strengths of Maven, and with > this > > > > automatism it could really be enhanced. > > > > > > > > My dislike: the `before:goal` invocation is being "projected" to non > > > > existent plugin invocation. This sounds like a hack. Could we clear > > that > > > > part up? > > > > > > > > > Could you explain what you mean? I’m not seeing what you are saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > > T > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:23 PM Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Le 25/10/2019 à 21:01, Stephen Connolly a écrit : > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Sounds interesting. You may want to forbid the before/after prefix > on > > > > > the deprecated phases (such as after:pre-clean). > > > > > > > > > > The name of the phases use to start with a verb, that would no > longer > > > be > > > > > true with the proposed 'sources' and 'resources' phases. Since it > > isn't > > > > > that common to invoke these phases directly from the command line > > maybe > > > > > the longer name could be retained to preserve the consistency > > > > > (generate-sources, etc). > > > > > > > > > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > -- > Sent from my phone >
