As it stands now, I haven't made any real accommodation for scoping, beyond
project-specific vs. build-global (there is no inter-build scope for
embedded applications, afaik).

However, right now the subject of scoping is a little undefined. That's what
this thread is for. :-)

-john

On 1/30/07, Scott Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I think this is a very useful proposal...particularly for supporting use
cases around runtime construction/modification of model (Wendell's
comments).

But is there any scoping mechanism in plexus and/or maven?  Or would the
shared context always be 'global' for all of maven + plugins?

I'm of the opinion that lack of scoping isn't a fatal problem with this
proposal, I'm just curious about what is possible.

Scott

John Casey wrote:
> Sorry, Brian...my comment was aimed at Jason Dillon. :-)
>
> Yes, I agree that the plugin in charge of something like compilation
> should
> be able to inform the rest of the build as to whether or not that action
> really took place. I think that sort of thing could lead to a build
> short-circuiting and stopping if an early plugin (or, enough early
> plugins)
> can determine that nothing needs to be done.
>
> -john
>
> On 1/30/07, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> yep, I like the way that train of thought is going...:)
>>
>> On 1/30/07, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Yes, understood. However, only the compiler plugin would be able to
>> know
>> > if during this run anything was actually compiled. If it communicated
>> > that somewhere, then other plugins could make decisions.
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 10:46 AM
>> > To: Maven Developers List
>> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] maven-build-context (Shared context for Maven
>> > components and plugins)
>> >
>> > One important thing to remember is that this is a build-time context,
>> > not a database or other type of persistent storage. If you wanted to
>> > detect farthest-progress between builds, you'd have to look in some
>> > other place (maybe a file, or just a timestamp comparison of the
>> > end-product artifact vs. the sources or something...
>> >
>> > The point is, this could help make a single build process more
>> > efficient, but not a series of builds.
>> >
>> > -john
>> >
>> > On 1/29/07, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > That would be nice!  If the default set of plugins would only do
>> work
>> > > if something really changed.  Then one could hope that `mvn
install`
>> > > would do a bunch of stuff, and if nothing changed the `mvn install`
>> > > again would complete much, much quicker.  But more importantly
>> running
>> >
>> > > `mvn deploy` after `mvn install` would just re-use the previously
>> > > packaged artifacts and not recompile or repackage anything.
>> > >
>> > > --jason
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Jan 29, 2007, at 6:23 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I can think of several use cases for this. The most obvious
>> would be
>> >
>> > > > the ability for jar to determine if compile or resources actually
>> > > > made any changes and decide if repackaging is needed.
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: Wendell Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:55 PM
>> > > > To: Maven Developers List
>> > > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] maven-build-context (Shared context for
>> > > > Maven components and plugins)
>> > > >
>> > > > I've read the doc and the irc and while I can see the benefit to
a
>> > > > shared context, I'm curious as to whether the current pressing
>> need
>> > > > is coming more from maven or the kepler project?  Doesn't matter
>> > > > either way just looking for the origin of the pain.  This
proposal
>> > > > looks to satisfy some of the OSGi builds issues I have
encountered
>> > > > if maven's project build order was in the shared context and a
>> > > > plugin/componet could update /modify that order such that OSGi
>> > > > bundles could be built easier with maven.
>> > > >
>> > > > Wb
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
>> > > > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
>> > > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to