What I did (and it confused users no end) is bind the string to a different field and have that field filled using the property name... so that anyone doing
-Dfoo.bar=...,...,... would populate the string field but anyone doing <bars> <bar>...</bar> <bar>...</bar> <bar>...</bar> </bars> would be populating the String[] field. Anyway it confuses the hell out of users On 3 January 2013 09:23, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote: > It will be a challenge and I'm not sure if it will make the documentation > easier. > > I think that this could work: > create a IncludedLicenses object with a String constructor and a > getter/setter for the list. > > I don't think that using setters in the mojo will work. I expect Plexus to > search for the setter bound to the type of the parameter. > > Let me know if one of these options worked. Maybe worth writing somewhere. > > Robert > > > Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 09:57:36 +0100 > > From: [email protected] > > To: mojo.codehaus.org [email protected] > > Subject: [mojo-dev] Strategy to change a parameter format > > > > > Hy, > > > > I try to resolve https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MLICENSE-53 > > > > We have actually a parameter (includedLicenses) read as a String and > then split (separated by comma), seems a good idea at the time it was > written... > > > > But now after using it, seems better to use a list of array of String > for this mojo parameter. > > > > Is there a strategy to change this configuration without breaking > old-style configuration ? I can't find a nice solution > > (other than adding a new parameter includedLicensesList for example). > > > > If anyone has already done something like this, or have a great idea, > please help :) > > > > BTW Happy new Year to codehauser :) > > > > thanks, > > > > tony. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > > >
