is it worth to create this structure ?
plugin-parent
pom.xml
mojo-parent
pom.xml
and both release at the same time.
I am seeing a big benefit for project under codehaus ( like izpack )
or other to take advantage of plugin-parent rather then each project
maintain its own parent.
:-) just nagging
-D
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Stephen Connolly
<[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/12/2 Lee Thompson <[email protected]>:
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> 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 deployed on repo1.maven.org, so you do not
>>> need to
>>> inherit those IT poms from mojo-parent
>>
>> I made this recommended change on CBUILDS and it works after a bit of
>> hacking, thanks.
>>
>> Dan wrote:
>>>May be we could split mojo-parent into 2? :-) the top one is reusable,
>>> the other one is MOJO specific
>>
>> Yeah, I was thinking the same, have "plugin-parent" and "mojo-parent".
>> Stephen and Benjamin are -1 on that idea.
>
> Actually, if you want to create a "plugin-parent" hosted at mojo, i'm
>
> -0 (i think it's a bad idea but I won't stop you)
>
> it's only if you are looking for me to maintain it
>
> -1
>
> and I would be -1 on "mojo-parent" inheriting from "plugin-parent"
>
> So if you want a "plugin-parent" that is hosted at mojo and does not
> either inherit from "mojo-parent" or sire "mojo-parent" (i.e. it's
> not a parent of mojo-parent) then i'm -0
>
> -Stephen
>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Dan Tran <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Tue, December 1, 2009 8:12:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [VOTE] Release Mojo Parent POM 23
>>
>> I think mojo-parent is a very good start since it is tested by many of
>> its sub project.
>>
>> May be we could split mojo-parent into 2? :-) the top one is reusable,
>> the other one is MOJO specific
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Lee Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Benjamin wrote:
>>>>Just keep in mind that the Archetye Plugin itself "instantiates"
>>>> archetypes. So when you talk about "adds no project infrastructure" it's
>>>> not
>>>> an issue of the plugin but a matter of creating an archetype that fits
>>>> your
>>>> needs.
>>>
>>> Check this out! This runs
>>>
>>> mvn archetype:create -DgroupId=com.myco.quickplugin \
>>> -DartifactId=test-plugin \
>>> -DarchetypeGroupId=org.apache.maven.archetypes \
>>> -DarchetypeArtifactId=maven-archetype-plugin
>>>
>>> maven-archetype-plugin is a plugin and an archetype
>>>
>>>
>>> http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-archetype-plugin/2.0-alpha-4/
>>>
>>> http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/archetypes/maven-archetype-plugin/1.0/
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
