On 02/10/2010, at 5:59 AM, Jesse Glick wrote:

> 3. Some way of declaring in general (say, plugin.xml#//mojo/dependencyGoal) 
> that a certain goal presupposes a different goal be used on reactor 
> dependencies, so that plain
> 
>  mvn -am -pl main run
> 
> would automatically invoke just 'install' (or 'package') on the calculated 
> dependencies. Note that this could be useful even with common plugins; 
> 'install' on a jar project really only needs to 'package' its jar 
> dependencies. (For compatibility reasons, a different switch than --also-make 
> could be introduced to enable the new behavior.)

This sounds most similar to the the open issues about "aliasing" certain goal 
names.

However, I don't agree that "install" on one and package on the dependencies 
would make sense - this would put something in the repository that potentially 
doesn't have it's dependencies there, making it unusable by other projects. 
This probably holds for other similar instances.

The problem you're seeing rather seems to be that jetty:run, and other 
standalone goals, which ensure "package" is run first, are not able to pass on 
the --auto-make to the forked lifecycle. That's probably the point it needs to 
be aligned. I do like the idea of chaining the goals together as a clearer way 
to run it though (install all first, then run the single goal locally).

> 
> Perhaps --also-make-dependents could benefit from per-project goal selection 
> as well; offhand I cannot think of a use case.
> 
> Are there plans for a more clever make mode? The 3.0 compatibility guide 
> implies that there are, but does not give any specifics.

I'm not sure what you're referring to that gave that indication?

Cheers,
Brett

--
Brett Porter
[email protected]
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to