so in other words execution with no goal bound.. will rollback to the declared
defaultGoal?http://maven.apache.org/pom.html
(i wonder if perhaps the defaultGoal is incorrect for what i'm seeing in
surefire)
thanks Steve ..and Happy New Year,
Martin
______________________________________________
..place long-winded disclaimer here.. > Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 11:22:34 -0500
> Subject: Re: A subtlety with forked executions, looking for advice
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
>
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Stephen Connolly
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > if phase is specified then goal is unused was my reading of the docs when I
> > read them (a while back and I am lazy and have not gone looking at/for the
> > docs since then)
>
> thanks. This implies that a forked execution of a mojo had better not
> depend on something produced in the reactor. I'm not sure that's
> unreasonable, even if it painted me into a pretty small corner in the
> license-maven-plugin due to my unwillingness to turn it into a
> multi-module project.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On 1 January 2013 15:01, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> My mystification just deepened.
> >>
> >> If @Execute only contains 'goal', and then the mojo is executed from
> >> command line, all is well.
> >>
> >> If I add a 'phase=', then the command-line execution stops working.
> >> That is, if I have both goal= and phase=, the goal seems to be
> >> ignored. And since nothing in the pom explicitly binds the goal to the
> >> phase, it never runs.
> >>
> >> Does this surprise anyone (else?)?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > In the license-maven-plugin, there is a goal called
> >> 'aggregate-add-third-party'.
> >> >
> >> > until this morning, it was annotated with:
> >> >
> >> > @Execute( goal = "add-third-party" )
> >> >
> >> > This caused a problem. The add-third-party Mojo can read data from
> >> > dependencies. So, if module (a) attached a resource, and module (b)
> >> > went to read that resource in add-third-party, it failed. Why?
> >> >
> >> > Well, 'add-third-party' is not part of a lifecycle. So forking it
> >> > executes nothing else. So, the dependency wasn't there in the reactor.
> >> >
> >> > Even if, by the way, the dependency was attached in an earlier phase
> >> > than the aggregate-add-third-party, it didn't help, since the fork
> >> > happens in the aggregating project before the modules happen.
> >> >
> >> > One solution to this is to add phase = SOMETHING to that @Execute, so
> >> > that the execution that produces the resource has somewhere to live.
> >> > Since the default phase for aggregate-add-third-party of
> >> > generate-resources, does generate-resources lead to a risk of
> >> > something circular?
> >> >
> >> > I suppose that another would be to define an entire lifecycle, and
> >> > thus create a phase just for the purpose of allowing things to happen
> >> > that feed add-third-party. Now the plugin would need to be listed as
> >> > an extension, which is a pain.
> >> >
> >> > Anyone have another suggestion?
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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]
>
