http://mojo.codehaus.org/properties-maven-plugin/write-active-profile-properties-mojo.html
and http://mojo.codehaus.org/properties-maven-plugin/write-project-properties-mojo.html Could have legitimate usages to my mind. Also, http://mojo.codehaus.org/properties-maven-plugin/set-system-properties-mojo.html is of use when dealing with plugins that reuse the Maven JVM to launch build tools... now we can (and should) argue that such plugins are bad and need fixing to fork a JVM and allow the user to inject system properties into that forked JVM, but when people are having a Get Things Done™ project running and fixing some other plugin is not something they may be able to take on. They should be able to file an issue in the offending plugin's issue tracker, for sure, but actually come up with a patch etc... that may be too much to ask. So if you have some plugin that is spewing a lot of logging into your build and you use the set-system-properties goal to set a system property to turn off that logging for the badly written plugin because you need to Get Things Done™... I don't see that as wrong. Now http://mojo.codehaus.org/properties-maven-plugin/read-project-properties-mojo.htmlis a whole other issue. The only use case I see for this is producing target environment theist artifacts, and we know The Maven Way™ is to be agnostic of the target environment... other use cases such as test environment config can be handled by having the tests read their properties from the properties file directly On 16 April 2013 10:28, Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> wrote: > We should keep in mind that this plugin could fool people into doing "bad > stuff" (not The Maven Way). To continue Stephen's comment on the > build-helper/meta-data mojo discussion, I'm not sure this is good. Also, > having a plugin setting properties will not always work with Maven 3 as > that happens too late in the build process. This could be a good thing > though as some "bad stuff" can't be done then (reading a property from a > local file to set a property defining a version of a dependency for > example)... > > I don't think this is a good plugin and there is a reason it hasn't been > developed for some time. Maybe we should retire it instead? > > /Anders > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Baptiste Mathus <bmat...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi, >> Please don't hesitate to attach patches for the bugs you're concerned >> with. >> I'll review them. If needed I could cut a release. >> >> As for the beta state, don't be too worried. A lot of plugins in mojo are >> in this state and it doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be discontinued. >> >> Cheers >> Le 15 avr. 2013 20:46, "Anderson Vaz" <d...@andersonvaz.com> a écrit : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This plugin is still 'alive'? I mean, there are some critical bug's >>> opened but without fixes and the version still in alpha release since years >>> ago. >>> I think that the idea behind this plugin is quite useful and I will be >>> glad in be allowed to fix the open bug's and help to promote this plugin to >>> a stable release. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> -- >>> Anderson Vaz >>> http://github.com/avaz >>> >> >
