Yes, that's why I only kept a single exception in the new API.

Le lun. 11 juil. 2022 à 13:59, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> It got aligned AFAIK ->
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/master/maven-core/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/lifecycle/internal/MojoExecutor.java#L382
>
> 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 lun. 11 juil. 2022 à 13:47, Christoph Läubrich <m...@laeubi-soft.de> a
> écrit :
>
> > I might be wrong, but in case of "build FAILURE" only a short error is
> > printed saying user should enable -X while with "BUILD ERROR" the
> > exception is printed, maybe with a hint not to blame maven :-)
> >
> > Am 11.07.22 um 13:43 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > In all discussions about this topic it seems that this distinctions
> never
> > > had been useful so there seems to be an agreement to get a single
> > exception
> > > "something went wrong in the mojo".
> > > Guess at the end being finer grain is not that useful for end user and
> > > makes writing mojo harder but I agree it can be neat to wrap the error
> > in a
> > > MavenMojoRuntimeException (mojo writer shouldn't instantiate) and add
> the
> > > source of the error...but at the end for end user it is the same, it
> > failed
> > > so he must read why and fix it so not sure it is worth the effort.
> > >
> > > 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 lun. 11 juil. 2022 à 12:38, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> Howdy,
> > >> and along this line...
> > >>
> > >> BUILD FAILURE - uncompilable source, test failed, badly configured
> > plugin,
> > >> missing something from build, etc. all the issues that user CAN (and
> > >> should) fix to have build pass, usually by editing sources, POM or
> > >> settings.
> > >>
> > >> BUILD ERROR - disk full, no perm to write to disk (ie. during
> resolve),
> > >> remote repo unreachable (during resolve), etc. issues  user MAY fix
> (ie.
> > >> wrong URL in POM) but also MAY NOT fix (ie. corp repoman down)
> > >>
> > >> T
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 12:32 PM Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Howdy,
> > >>>
> > >>> AFAIR one of the reasons for these two exceptions were to distinguish
> > >>> cases like:
> > >>> * expected exception during execution of Mojo: most typical,
> > uncompilable
> > >>> source, or bad config/param, or something alike, condition the user
> CAN
> > >>> (and should) fix, usually by editing sources, POM or settings.
> > >>> * unexpected exception during execution of Mojo: IO/permission, disk
> > >> full,
> > >>> network, whatever -- this condition user MAY fix or may not be able
> to
> > >> fix
> > >>> (ie. some remote resource is down)
> > >>>
> > >>> Re Guillaume proposal: IMHO it lacks this distinction above....
> > >>>
> > >>> T
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 9:56 PM Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I have the following proposal for the new API:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/gnodet/maven/tree/m-api-immutable/api/maven-api-core/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/api/plugin
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Le sam. 9 juil. 2022 à 15:23, Slawomir Jaranowski <
> > >> s.jaranow...@gmail.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> a écrit :
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Today - Maven 3.8.6 both exception generate the same message: BUILD
> > >>>> FAILURE
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We have some inconsistencies in javadocs descriptions [1].
> > >>>>> We also have the wrong description on guide page [2].
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There was a discussion about it, some on slack, some on GitHub [3]
> > and
> > >>>>> connected issue MNG-7351 [4]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> As I remember we want one exception for Mojo in Maven 4.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> So it will be good to make a decision about it and fix mentioned
> > place
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>> be consistent.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://maven.apache.org/ref/3.8.6/apidocs/org/apache/maven/plugin/Mojo.html#execute--
> > >>>>> [2]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/plugin/guide-java-plugin-development.html
> > >>>>> [3] https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/632
> > >>>>> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7351
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Sławomir Jaranowski
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> ------------------------
> > >>>> Guillaume Nodet
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>


-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet

Reply via email to