Dear Maven devs, At our company Genesys, we are holding a Hackathon in the following days. Me and one of my colleagues decided to contribute to maven and specifically enforcer plugin, because we use it in a daily basis and have some ideas to improve the output format. Before throwing in any PRs, I would like to ask for some guidance, so it will be easier for both parties to get along.
* Should we just modify the current output format, or would you like us to make it possible for an alternative output, that can be chosen by the user? * If the latter option seems better, what is the desired way to specify the option? Switch on command line, pom.xml config in the plugin section, etc? * Maybe a different option would be create a similar rule, but with *simple name. * We only use require upper bounds rule: https://maven.apache.org/enforcer/enforcer-rules/requireUpperBoundDeps.html Is it possible to only apply the alternative output for this one? Do you need us to include all built in rules? * What are the conventions and requirements for a certain PR to be accepted? We would like to conform. Generally our intention is to make the output more human friendly, because the current one is very verbose, lists unnecessary / unrelated issues, and generally it is pretty hard to pick up what explicit dependency needs to be increased. (In our test case, a single modification to only one dependency would create a total of 8 lines of problems, of which only 3 were necessary). Our alternative output would be some table maybe, with the following columns: * Explicit dependency identifier * Local version (to be increased) * Higher version(s) found in the transitive graph This version would lack some information that is present in the current one, but most of the times that is not necessary. Kindly looking forward for your response, cheers Gyorgy and Praveen
