Thanks for writing Stephen I think this addition breaks some uses of mojo-parent. I think mojo-parent is the best definition of which plugins are current and working in the <pluginmanagement> section of the POM and a good place to start for project reporting in the <reporting> section. With the addition of the no repositories rule, aren't I restricted from inheriting from mojo-parent to develop a non-mojo plugin for a company and publishing to an internal repo?
Case in point, several people have asked me how to write a maven plugin and I tell them just inherit from mojo-parent and overload the mailing lists, jira, and repo definitions. This won't work anymore and the starting point in playing around would be to copy paste what you want out of mojo-parent. Duplication is Evil... Maybe we need a plugin-parent that mojo-parent inherits from? Lee ________________________________ From: Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, December 1, 2009 1:04:56 AM Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [VOTE] Release Mojo Parent POM 23 1. if your integration test is run using, eg maven-invoker-plugin or one of the other tools, then it will not be going to be deployedon repo1.maven.org, so you do not need to inherit those IT poms from mojo-parent 2. I thought the message was self explanitory. the rules for pom's being pushed to repo1 are "no repositories (with snapshot exception)". we are being pushed to repo1, therefore must follow the rules Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-) On 1 Dec 2009, at 03:05, Lee Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: Hi guys, didn't get to test this over the US holidays. > >For the CBUILDS I overload the repo during the integration test phase to >isolate the tests from the internet so I can test "mvn release"... (Imagine >that). The latest parent hates this... I'm using maven-invoker-plugin.. > > >[WARNING] Rule 1: org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.RequireNoRepositories >failed with message: >Some poms have repositories defined: >org.codehaus.mojo.patch.it:it-project-parent version:1 has repositories >[integration.test.remote.repo]Mojo is syncronized with repo1.maven.org. The >rules for repo1.maven.org are that pom.xml files should not include repository >definitions. If repository definitions are included, they must be limited to >SNAPSHOT only > repositories. >[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >[INFO] BUILD FAILURE >[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >1) Is there a way to to say "stuff it" to the rule during integration test >phase? That way I can keep current with the parent. > >2) What is the issue with overloading/specifying repos in the POM? > >Thanks, >Lee > > > ________________________________ From: Benjamin Bentmann <[email protected]> >To: Mojo Developer List <[email protected]> >Sent: Sat, November 21, 2009 11:08:15 AM >Subject: [mojo-dev] [VOTE] Release Mojo Parent POM 23 > >>Hi, > >apart from the usual plugin version updates, the new parent provides >a) an enforcer rule to help preventing repos in the POM and >b) a profile "mojo-release" to produce a complete source distro > >Complete overview of changes since last release: >http://fisheye.codehaus.org/browse/mojo/trunk/mojo/mojo-parent/pom.xml?r1=10743&r2=11290 > >An up-to-date snapshot is deployed. > >[ ] +1 >[ ] 0 >[ ] -1 > >The vote is open for 72 hours and will succeed by lazy consensus. > > >Benjamin > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
