On Tuesday 11 May 2004 21:20, Adam R. B. Jack wrote: > > On Mon, 10 May 2004, Adam R. B. Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think we bite the bullet and change our id's to be artefact ids > > > (changing metadata as we need). Any thoughts? > > > > Is there a 1:1 mapping of Maven artefacts to <jar>s? > > I *beleive* so.
Not entirely true... 1. There may not be any Jar at all, if the project generates something else. 2. There may be more than one Jar, if the maven.xml in the project is made to construct any number of Jars. There is a big distinction between Maven default behaviour and what can actually be done. I suggest that Gump would follow the Ant model, except that there is not necessarily any 'build file', but a 'build dir', in which a Maven goal is invoked. Regarding the 'dependencies', I suggest that Gump places all the 'builds' into the local repository "~/.maven/repository", and then just run Maven in off-line mode. It shouldn't be necessary to depend on the plugins being Gump aware, IMHO, as Brett was indicating. Niclas -- +---------//-------------------+ | http://www.bali.ac | | http://niclas.hedhman.org | +------//----------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
