I've created TUSCANY-2819 to track doing this. ...ant
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 9:36 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes the problem with the notice files is fixed now so it would be really > good to have "mvn eclipse:eclipse" work as thats the standard way to do > this. So what are the plugins that don't get activated when using -Peclipse > so we can see if there's some other way we can fix that? (I can't help much > investigate this just now as I've still not got it to work properly with > -Peclipse yet) > > What I think we should be trying to do is make tuscany work in the most > standard way as possible so people can get started with minimal education. I > can checkout lots of projects which use maven and without any reading know i > can do things like "mvn" or "mvn clean install" or "mvn eclipse:eclipse" > from the top of the src and have it build and setup in an ide, and that > standard consistent behaviour makes it so much easier to start working. > > ...ant > > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We have eclipse:eclipse as the default goal for "eclipse" profile >> (-Peclipse). The "eclipse" profile gives us a bit control, for example, some >> plugins won't be activated under that profile as "eclipse:eclipse" will >> trigger all the plugins using "generate-resources" phase. >> >> I also remember that we use "eclipse" profile to work around an >> issue related to the the NOTICE/LICENSE file in the root of the project. But >> it seems that the latest Eclipse plugin can handle the source folder >> overlapping and exclusion now. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> *From:* ant elder <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Friday, January 30, 2009 9:55 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: svn commit: r739245 - >> /tuscany/java/sca/modules/core/pom.xml >> [snip] >> >> >>> >>> Hi Ant >>> >>> You don't need eclipse:eclipse anymore. Give mvn -Peclipse a try and see >>> if that helps. >>> >>> >> Is there a reason we have to do this with a -Peclipse (sorry if its >> obvious I've not looked at all how this is setup), it would be nice if we >> could keep the "mvn eclipse:eclipse" standard instead of using our own >> special way. >> >> ...ant >> >> > >
