In the very specific case of groupId/artifactId/version pattern which is
currently very verbose I would tend to agree to allow shorter syntax using
attributes instead of elements.
dependency groupId= artifactId= version= classifier= scope=/
plugin groupId= artifactId= version=
personally, given the fun with rewriting XML at the moment, (see
versions maven plugin) I would prefer to just have the current XML
format. adding more formats makes some of the things that the versions
maven current does a little harder to support.
Sent from my [rhymes with myPod] ;-)
On
I'm not convinced this is a good idea: MPIR is fixed now, but this hack will
prevent anybody to output \u0092 when it is the real character they want.
Regards,
Hervé
Le samedi 05 septembre 2009, vsive...@apache.org a écrit :
Author: vsiveton
Date: Sat Sep 5 12:46:15 2009
New Revision:
Hi Hervé,
2009/9/5 Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr:
I'm not convinced this is a good idea: MPIR is fixed now, but this hack will
prevent anybody to output \u0092 when it is the real character they want.
Using \u0092 char will be displayed as # in the pdf so I don't think
user want to use
On 05/09/2009, at 12:58 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
Since the source in this case is identical, having separate modules
for this seems out of the way. Classifier really is the right way to
distinguish between different flavors normally, but obviously this
doesn't work well when you have to produce
Is it in scope to move things that are still relevant from MAVEN on
codehaus over?
What about thoughts on moving over MAVENUSER as is now?
- Brett
On 04/09/2009, at 4:07 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I created a space for working on Maven 3.x and I definitely do not
want that publicly
On 2009-09-05, at 4:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 05/09/2009, at 12:58 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
Since the source in this case is identical, having separate modules
for this seems out of the way. Classifier really is the right way to
distinguish between different flavors normally, but obviously
On 2009-09-05, at 2:45 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
personally, given the fun with rewriting XML at the moment, (see
versions maven plugin) I would prefer to just have the current XML
format. adding more formats makes some of the things that the
versions maven current does a little harder
On 2009-09-05, at 5:27 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
Is it in scope to move things that are still relevant from MAVEN on
codehaus over?
I created a Maven space with the intent of creating the Maven 3.x site
with it but if you want to migrate the content go for it.
What about thoughts on
I agree with you and Jason van Zyl about Maven probably doesn't need to support
another option. However, it would be nice if the architecture supported it
more easily.
This would mean everything is accessed through a clean API and that we could
easily inject our own POM parser. If someone
On 2009-09-05, at 10:23 PM, Jason Chaffee wrote:
I agree with you and Jason van Zyl about Maven probably doesn't need
to support another option. However, it would be nice if the
architecture supported it more easily.
It does and I used it in a prototype Groovy and JRuby sort of version
On 06/09/2009, at 4:57 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 2009-09-05, at 4:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 05/09/2009, at 12:58 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
Since the source in this case is identical, having separate modules
for this seems out of the way. Classifier really is the right way to
distinguish
12 matches
Mail list logo
