I think a "codehaus-parent" would be a good idea. But remember that the "codehaus-parent" would have to enforce the noRepositories rule too (or else codehaus would have to stop pushing repository.codehaus.org to repo1.maven.org
I see the "plugin-parent" that Lee is after being completely separate from a "codehaus-parent" or "mojo-parent" -Stephen 2009/12/2 Dan Tran <[email protected]>: > 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 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
