[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJAR-62?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15097311#comment-15097311
]
Nathan Revo commented on MJAR-62:
---------------------------------
[~michael-o]I will look into creating a patch. What maven version were you
referring to in your comment? Also, it felt like my custom plugin would turn
into a messy patch as I was calling the "javac" command directly and parsing
the output.
Here are some questions I have that should be addressed before a meaningful
patch can be created:
* How are these options handled for for compiling code and/or making archives
(jar files). What is the precedence?
* - runtime jdk. assuming it is a JDK and not just a JRE use javac/jar
binaries from here?
* - toolchains.xml, is it present, is it configured properly, use javac/jar
binaries from here?
* - compiler executable, do I use the value from the maven compiler plugin, do
I provide one in the archiver plugin?
* - java.home environment variable, is this where javac or jar are executed
from?
* which plugin will this be added to? archiver, compiler, jar?
> Build-Jdk in Manifest.mf does not reflect which compiler version actually
> compiled the classes in the jar
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MJAR-62
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJAR-62
> Project: Maven JAR Plugin
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Stefan Magnus Landrø
> Attachments: example-app.zip
>
>
> Manifest.mf does not reflect the version of the compiler that built the jar,
> but defaults to the version that maven runs under: Build-Jdk:
> ${java.version}.
> I believe this makes users uncertain of which compiler was actually used to
> build the classes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
