Hey Chris, I'm sorry :( This was not my intention.
See the other mail, we found a workaround ;) Greetings -Sascha- Am 28.09.2012 07:50, schrieb Chris Graham: > Yes, thanks. You've send me back to the drawing board... > > On 28/09/2012, at 12:23 AM, Sascha Vogt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> First of all, thank you very much for the explanation. I wasn't aware of >> that up to know. Will definitely look into a different solution. >> Nevertheless I want to understand a bit more to evaluate possible ways >> to go. >> >> Am 27.09.2012 16:06, schrieb Jörg Schaible: >>>> Am 27.09.2012 15:07, schrieb Jörg Schaible: >>>>> Sascha Vogt wrote: >>>> The idea was to have one Mojo extend another Mojo. >>> In M2, it is simply not reliable and should therefore never be done. >> Ok, for M2 the stuff we did is bad :) For now let's concentrate on M3 >> >>>> There is also a >>>> maven-inherit-plugin out there >>>> (https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.construct/tree/master/maven- >>> inherit-plugin) >>>> which suffers from the same issue. >>> >>> Yes, I complained about that before. >>> >>>> What do you mean by different classloader model? >>> >>> M3 uses isolated classloaders for the individual plugins. >> So with the isolated classloaders the extension of a plugin could/should >> work as expected (aka even if there are multiple different versions >> referenced)? Or do you mean that in M3 if I extend plugin a, my plugin >> shouldn't see classes from plugin a? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
