Also sounds like we need to update the archetype based on whatever approach we come up with, either adding those properties to the NAR Pom in the archetype, or having it use a specific parent.
On Wednesday, March 16, 2016, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would certainly like to better understand what you have in mind. > > thanks > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > we could make a parent pom for all the nar modules. > > > > wanna see what that looks like? > > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> Team, > >> > >> During the previous build/release cycle it was found that > >> javadocs/sources were being made for the Nar bundles themselves and > >> was causing invalid licensing/notice information to be present. All > >> the existing bundles and the archetypes were fixed for this. Just be > >> sure on new nars to include these as well if you aren't copying from > >> something existing or using the archetype. I just fixed a couple of > >> them for new things in the 0.6.0 release. > >> > >> The nar pom itself should have a properties section such as > >> > >> <properties> > >> <maven.javadoc.skip>true</maven.javadoc.skip> > >> <source.skip>true</source.skip> > >> </properties> > >> > >> Perhaps there is a nicer maven way of ensuring this doesn't happen for > Nars. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Joe > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile
