Put some comments inline but agree another minilanguage solution works. Maybe -pl !!parent?
Le dim. 21 févr. 2021 à 22:08, Martin Kanters <martinkant...@apache.org> a écrit : > Romain: 2 has overlap if I'm not mistaken, what if the user invokes: mvn > -pl project-a -plr !project-a. Perhaps the user should be able to only > select aggregator poms via -plr.. > And I'm not sure how the alias function would work. I assume something > like: > Yes but same as today with -pl foo -pl!foo. We can fail in such a case too (my preference). Then more specific wins, ie -plr parent -pl !parent/foo is obvious. - pom.xml config (psuedo code): <alias><rec>-pl parent, submodule-a, > submodule-b, submodule-c</rec></alias> > - invocation mvn alias:rec. > If that assumption is correct, the user would have to manually maintain the > list of modules of "parent", while Maven can do this perfectly. > Right, is it an issue? I dont think. Opposite is true too, you need to maintain children exclusions in general (all but "build" child module or all but front or all but doc etc) so 1-1 IMHO. > Falko: I don't intend to drop the recursive behavior either :) > I don't dislike the idea of adding a suffix to a project to include > everything recursively and + might fix the shell expansion issue (which * > has). > I guess this might be a nice alternative as well, but I'm not sure if > everybody likes increasing the complexity of the -pl syntax. "-pl !?proj/+" > or "-pl !?group:artifact+" is starting to look a bit like magic.. :) > Martin > > Op zo 21 feb. 2021 om 21:38 schreef Falko Modler <f.mod...@gmx.net>: > > > My 2 cents: Please don't drop the recursive behavior again because it is > > really useful! > > > > Crazy idea (just brainstorming here): > > -pl foo builds only foo > > -pl foo+ builds foo and its children, wherever they are exactly > > > > This would also co-exist with the ! and ? prefixes. > > > > PS: Since if often use shell path completion, -pl foo/+ should have the > > same effect, ideally. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Falko > > > > Am 21.02.2021 um 21:09 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > > > Le dim. 21 févr. 2021 à 20:39, Martin Kanters < > martinkant...@apache.org> > > a > > > écrit : > > > > > >> Hm, so I guess that's indeed a valid reason to keep the old > > functionality > > >> working. Thanks for the enlightenment, Romain. > > >> Still I think it makes more sense to make project selection recursive > by > > >> default, but it's not straightforward to come up with a nice > > combination of > > >> flags. > > >> Let's summarize: > > >> > > >> 1. -pl + -N: > > >> While it does sound like the flag to re-use, I do not like the fact > > that -N > > >> works differently than normal when used together with -pl. The code > > would > > >> become more complex and the flag hard to explain to users. > > >> > > > Does not really solves the issue as soon as you use it for 2 different > > kind > > > of modules until it becomes -plN which is 4 IMHO > > > > > > > > >> 2. -pl + -plr: > > >> This gives the most flexibility, giving users the option to select > > >> non-recursive and recursive projects in one command. The two flags > have > > a > > >> lot of overlap though, what happens when a project is selected with > -pl > > and > > >> deselected with -plr, which gets precedence etc. > > >> > > > -plr without -pl, dont use a global toggle probably. > > > > > > Ex: -pl parent-with-plugins -plr myaggregator -pl foo/bar -plr > > docker-images > > > > > > > > >> 3. -pl <proj>/* > > >> This gives the same flexibility as 2, but then in one command. I do > like > > >> that, but it can get messy with shell expansion. One other thing is > that > > >> with -pl you can select projects using the directory, but also by > > >> (optionally groupid and) artifactId. The star (or its replacement) > could > > >> mean different things when used in either variant. Mind that > submodules > > do > > >> not have to be placed directly in a subdirectory. > > >> > > > Other issue is maven works with not linear (tree) children so can be > > > complex to handle when parents or children are in other physical tree > or > > > even projects. > > > > > > > > >> 4. (new idea) -pl + --pl-non-recursive: > > >> This does not have the flexibility 2 and 3 provides and we would have > to > > >> introduce a new CLI flag. But it does have a very clear goal which is > > easy > > >> to implement + explain. > > >> > > > Hmm another global toggle? It will have the same combination issue than > > -N > > > IMHO. > > > So overall this sounds like reversing -pl and adding this complementary > > > option so 2 sounds the saner equivalent option for backward compat. > > > > > > > > >> 5. Revert all and restore 3.6.3 functionality. > > >> Users could build extensions or plugin functionality to achieve the > > >> recursiveness. Not my favorite, because I think this is something > Maven > > >> Core should be able to provide out of the box. > > >> > > > "Extension" can be built in too, just mentionned we can solve it > > > differently than enriching again the cli since functionally we already > > > cover it. > > > > > > > > >> 6. Make recursiveness the default and do not provide a workaround for > > >> non-recursiveness > > >> Since we are going to a new major version it's acceptable to > > break/change > > >> existing behavior. We could wait until users complain and then build > > >> something in. > > >> Not my favorite (anymore) either, since apparently it's a common > > use-case > > >> that we would break. > > >> > > > Just my 2cts but sounds the worse. > > > Even if going major backward compat is key for not internals otherwise > we > > > do another build tool and break everyone which is always a moment of > > > temptation to reject the tool, in particular when trivial to avoid from > > > user PoV. > > > > > > > > >> I understand the thread might've become hard to follow, so I hope this > > >> summary helps other people to join the discussion. > > >> My current favorite is 4. > > >> > > > > > > Personally, I'd say investigate alias option and if not satistying then > > use > > > 2. > > > > > > > > >> Martin > > >> > > >> Op za 20 feb. 2021 om 17:53 schreef Romain Manni-Bucau < > > >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > >> > > >>> I like the regex idea but wildcard (*) does not work well due to > common > > >>> shell expansion (or it already works but it is outside of maven scope > > to > > >> be > > >>> concrete). > > >>> > > >>> My 2cts would be that, to be honest, I think we all lead to have > > aliases > > >> in > > >>> maven for potentially very long commands (there was some threads > about > > >> it), > > >>> CLI then just needs to enable to activate/deactivate things, not to > be > > >>> clever and it would enable all combination without any behavior > change > > >> nor > > >>> new option IMHO. Concretely "mvn alias:bd" would run "mvn -pl foo/bar > > -pl > > >>> foo/dummy" for example. Thinking out loud it can be done with a > plugin > > >>> already so can maybe give a try if it sounds like a good idea for > > others > > >>> too. > > >>> > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau > > >>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > >>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > > >>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > > >>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > >>> < > > >>> > > >> > > > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > >>> > > >>> Le sam. 20 févr. 2021 à 14:40, Falko Modler <f.mod...@gmx.net> a > > écrit : > > >>> > > >>>> Thanks for the quick reaction/answers! > > >>>> > > >>>> TBH, I haven't fully understood why -N cannot be used here. I do > > >>>> understand that -N reduces the reactor to one project (before > project > > >>>> selection via -pl can kick in). > > >>>> But what if -N wouldn't be applied if -pl is present? It would then > > >>> become > > >>>> a "secondary" option, only applying to the projects selected or > > >>> deselected > > >>>> via -pl. > > >>>> > > >>>> However, the most flexible and fully backwards compatiple solution > > >> would > > >>>> indeed be something like -plr as suggested before. You could then > also > > >>> mix > > >>>> and match -pl and -plr. > > >>>> > > >>>> Btw, half offtopic: I proposed [1] to add ? to -pl and in that > context > > >> I > > >>>> also thought about wildcard support for -pl, but Robert didn't like > > the > > >>>> idea. > > >>>> I'm just thinking whether -pl foo/* might be something that could > help > > >>>> here as well, but it wouldn't be trivial to do, I suppose. > > >>>> PS: -help doesn't mention ! at all. > > >>>> > > >>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6511 > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> Falko > > >>>> > > >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > >
