More proposals by Benjamin. I'll apply everything but the scm-part, don't know
what to do with these.
Robert
Index: pom.xml
===================================================================
--- pom.xml (revision 556)
+++ pom.xml (working copy)
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
<licenses>
<license>
<name>The Apache Software License, Version 2.0</name>
- <url>http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0</url>
+ <url>http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt</url>
<distribution>repo</distribution>
</license>
</licenses>
@@ -26,9 +26,9 @@
</issueManagement>
<scm>
-
<connection>scm:svn:https://svn.codehaus.org/qdox/trunk/qdox</connection>
+
<connection>scm:svn:http://svn.codehaus.org/qdox/trunk/qdox</connection>
<developerConnection>scm:svn:https://svn.codehaus.org/qdox/trunk/qdox</developerConnection>
- <url>http://svn.qdox.codehaus.org/trunk/qdox</url>
+ <url>http://fisheye.codehaus.org/browse/qdox/trunk</url>
</scm>
<developers>
@@ -127,6 +127,7 @@
<plugins>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-antrun-plugin</artifactId>
+ <version>1.3</version>
<configuration>
<tasks>
<java classpath="bootstrap/jflex.jar" classname="JFlex.Main"
fork="true">
@@ -164,6 +165,7 @@
<configuration>
<source>1.4</source>
<target>1.4</target>
+ <encoding>UTF-8</encoding>
</configuration>
</plugin>
<plugin>
@@ -340,6 +342,7 @@
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-project-info-reports-plugin</artifactId>
+ <version>2.1</version>
<reportSets>
<reportSet>
<reports>
@@ -356,10 +359,12 @@
<plugin>
<groupId>org.codehaus.mojo</groupId>
<artifactId>cobertura-maven-plugin</artifactId>
+ <version>2.2</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-javadoc-plugin</artifactId>
+ <version>2.4</version>
<configuration>
<packagenames>com.thoughtworks.qdox.*</packagenames>
<use>true</use>
@@ -367,6 +372,7 @@
<windowtitle>${project.name} ${project.version}
API</windowtitle>
<tag name="noinspection" description="IntelliJ Inspection Ignore
tag" enabled="false" />
+ <encoding>UTF-8</encoding>
</configuration>
</plugin>
@@ -374,6 +380,7 @@
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-changes-plugin</artifactId>
+ <version>2.1</version>
<configuration>
<issueLinkTemplate>%URL%/%ISSUE%</issueLinkTemplate>
</configuration>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:48:45 +0100
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [qdox-dev] pom of qdox
Cheers :)
2009/2/17 Paul Hammant <[email protected]>
OK, take a look at http://fisheye.codehaus.org/changelog/qdox/?cs=555
Regards,
- Paul
On Feb 17, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Robert Scholte wrote:
I have to agree with joseph. An example for provided is the servlet-api: you
need it for both compilation and runtime, but it won't be included.
In this case it's pretty rare you need the dependency at runtime, so optional
is a better choice. (provided suggests some jvm already has the jar)
And the jmock is only required during test, doesn't it? So let's just give it
the test-scope.
-Robert
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:47:37 +0100
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [qdox-dev] pom of qdox
That will work, but isn't semantically correct; I think
<scope>compile</scope>
<optional>true</optional>
would be more correct. But then again, I'm just nitpicking, I don't think it
makes any real difference.
-g
2009/2/17 Paul Hammant <[email protected]>
I've changed three scopes to 'provided'. It means that they won't cascade to
Maven user's deps transitively. It also blurs the distinction between 'test'
and 'compile'.
Thoughts?
Regards,
- Paul
On Feb 17, 2009, at 9:32 AM, Grégory Joseph wrote:
I think they're used by xdoclet/generama, for instance (which in turn provide
abstract testcase for their plugins so they can check generated code against
expected code, and ant tasks to generate some code).
These dependencies (ant and junit) should probably be marked as optional, then.
Just my 2 unverified cents,
-g
2009/2/17 Robert Scholte <[email protected]>
Last time I noticed that the dependencies are missing their scope.
Both junit and jmock should have the test-scope.
It seems there's some lost class in the sourcefolder, which depends on junit,
namely com.thoughtworks.qdox.junit.APITestCase
there are no references to this class, so I would nominate it for deletion.
And I guess the ant-dependency should be at least 1.5.1 and optional
But wait a minute... isn't com.thoughtworks.qdox.ant.AbstractQdoxTask just as
lost? Ok, it has some tests, but that's the only usage I can find.
another nomination?
regards,
Robert
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger
_________________________________________________________________
What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx
