On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
David wrote:
What do you guys think of adding:
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-changes-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.1</version>
[...]
</plugin>
to the mojo-parent?
Given that not all plugins have dedicated JIRA projects, it appears that
would be troublesome for those. Just consider all the sandbox plugins. I'm
not sure it's worth to create JIRA components for all of them just to get a
reasonable report output.
Sure - but this parent is only used by released (there is another one for
sandboxed). From:
http://mojo.codehaus.org/development/performing-a-release.html
"Create a separate JIRA project for the plugin."
So they should always have a jira project.
So I still think this is a good idea - it would in fact "enforce" that you
define a jira project - like you should. (And even if you hadn't - it
would use the default MOJO project).
Also - can we switch the surefire-reporting to report-only, to avoid
rerunning tests in a normal build?
-0, I usually run "mvn clean site-deploy" for a deployment and having
Surefire run the tests frees me from remembering to also run the test phase.
Yeah - maybe best - I just got caught in Hudson failing on it - and as I
said - not a good point :-)
For quick site generation and review of hand-crafted docs, the latest
mojo-parent provides a system property to skip most of the expensive reports
in analogy to Surefire's skipTests
mvn site -D skipReports
ah nice - just what I needed! thanks
--
David J. M. Karlsen - +47 90 68 22 43
http://www.davidkarlsen.com
http://mp3.davidkarlsen.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
