[ 
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASSEMBLY-700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Karl-Heinz Marbaise closed MASSEMBLY-700.
-----------------------------------------

    Resolution: Not A Bug
      Assignee: Karl-Heinz Marbaise

Hm. May be i misundestand a thing but i can't see a buggy behaviour here, cause 
maven-assembly-plugin (component descriptor) uses the properties you have 
defined in your pom. Hm..I will close the issue, cause this is no bug in 
contrary it's exactly designed behaviour. I would suggest that you create a 
feature request which will scream loud by using an option. 
If you have different opinion don't hesitate to reopen the issue.

> Difference in property expansion between pom and assembly components
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MASSEMBLY-700
>                 URL: https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASSEMBLY-700
>             Project: Maven Assembly Plugin
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: component descriptor
>    Affects Versions: 2.4
>         Environment: Java 8 update 5
> Maven 3.2.1
> Linux (Fedora 20 x86_64)
>            Reporter: Andreas Kohn
>            Assignee: Karl-Heinz Marbaise
>
> My pom.xml contains a property {{java.version}} which points to the version 
> of java to include in our assembly. In the assembly component for including 
> java I refer to this property.
> {code:title=pom.xml dependency}
> <project>
>   <dependencies> 
>     <!-- Private Java VM -->
>     <dependency>
>       <groupId>com.oracle.java</groupId>
>       <artifactId>jdk</artifactId>
>       <version>${java.version}</version>
>       <classifier>linux-x64</classifier>
>       <type>tar.gz</type>
>       <!-- "included" -->
>       <scope>provided</scope>
>     </dependency>
>   </dependencies>
>   <properties>
>     <java.version>1.7.0_55</java.version>
>   </properties>
> </project>
> {code}
> (the GAV point to a manually deployed JDK artifact)
> {code:title=jdk component}
> <component 
>       
> xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/component/1.1.2"; 
>       xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
>       
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/component/1.1.2
>  http://maven.apache.org/xsd/component-1.1.2.xsd";>
>       <dependencySets>
>               <!-- Private (stripped) Java VM -->
>               <dependencySet>
>                       <outputDirectory>releases</outputDirectory>
>                       <includes>
>                               <include>com.oracle.java:jdk:tar.gz</include>
>                       </includes>
>                       <unpack>true</unpack>
>                       <unpackOptions>
>                               <excludes>
>                                       <!-- Can likely exclude more, but these 
> seem to be stable and bring enough value -->
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/db/</exclude>
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/src.zip</exclude>
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/lib/missioncontrol/</exclude>
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/lib/visualvm/</exclude>
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/man/</exclude>
>                                       
> <exclude>jdk${java.version}/jre/lib/desktop/</exclude>
>                               </excludes>
>                       </unpackOptions>
>                       <scope>provided</scope>
>                       <useProjectArtifact>false</useProjectArtifact>
>               </dependencySet>
>       </dependencySets>
> </component>
> {code}
> The goal is to trim the size of this artifact to speed up automatic 
> deployments.
> Unfortunately I noticed that the exclusions stopped working when the version 
> of java i'm using for building and the version of java to be included differ: 
> the maven-assembly-plugin seems to be expanding 'java.version' to the system 
> property, not the pom property.
> I worked around this by using a different property name, but this 
> inconsistency could potentially confuse people.
> Maybe the plugin could "scream loudly" when such a situation is detected, or 
> use the same priorities when resolving properties as in pom expansion?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.6#6162)

Reply via email to