On 2009-06-22, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Simply treat this parent POM as a normal artifact where all other
> artifacts are depending on.
This won't work without coding on the Gump side of things (which means
we won't resolve it too quickly since coding Gump is not high on
anybody's agenda).
The Maven repository proxy doesn't know about POMs, so this would be
the first thing that needed to be fixed. Once it does we could inject
the POM by abusing <jar> but we'd really hit the point where an
"artifact" generalization of jar should come in.
> Depending on how the release process is planned, relative paths are
> not possible at all.
Understood. This means we'll have to adapt to it in the long run.
OTOH it seems possible to use in the Excalibur case and it is likely
Robert will get to it prior to Gump gaining support for POM artifacts.
Thanks
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@gump.apache.org
