rmannibucau commented on PR #756: URL: https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/756#issuecomment-1161988690
> drop pom.xml: are we so constrained that we start complexifying? Guess that to be fair it should be asked both ways, is current verbosity worth it and holding any information? Less is printed better it is IMHO and complexity is quite relative so think so personally. > mono-module: ok, we can do it, but does it deserve special case? Don't think so since the same issue hits big multimodule projects. > debug mode: it defeats the intent = have useful info on normal run (if we run debug mode, we're already lost in details) it is no more true since we get logger configuration on the CLI so we have built-in toggles now :) > "Generally speaking module name should be sufficient if dev did it right.": no, definitely no, if you have 5 levels of directories and you put them in the module name, you're lost Hmm, do you have some examples? Took tomee, activemq, cxf, camel and it is not the case and it is already complex enough projects IMHO. The side note there can be that all this implementation assumes using a single thread so can not even solve the original use case (this is where I mentionned putting it per line in compressed form). -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
