Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Once you've run an archetype, you have a new project. And you're stuck with it, in the sense that you have to keep it maintained. An important question is this: what artifacts do you want to make as part of a release? If you want a portfolio of artifacts, each for one of your scenarios, then

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Maven is a great tool but it is not designed to build installation packages. Would your problem be better solved using one or more installer generation projects (in Maven) that gather and package the final set of files that are to be used to deploy the app to the run-time environments? I use

Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Hello, Being a avid Maven user for years, I have been drilled to avoid using or minimize profiles usage in a Maven build. Even more when it is geared to adapt for a runtime context. I always managed to find a way to convice people to do otherwise until now ... A solution was provided, via Maven

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Re, Basically, the end result would be to support multiple teams with multiple web application servers and setup (shared libs vs non shared libs). Thus each internal team does not go back and forth between setups/server. For a vast majority of cases, the decision is done once, at the start of the

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Sounds like my installer idea will solve your problem and be much easier to maintain. Develop the code in a set of projects that don't care about deployment and have one or more projects that know about installation requirements and build one or more installers that deal with all of the

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

Re, The installer concept *could* fit the bill with some adjustments, it's just that the build process is tweaked dependending on the target web server/deployement type. This would require changes which I don't have much weight to throw at. Has for the multi pom solution, it's actually the thing

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

On 19/10/2015 1:51 PM, Patrick Sansoucy wrote: Re, The installer concept *could* fit the bill with some adjustments, it's just that the build process is tweaked dependending on the target web server/deployement type. Wouldn't the installer get rid of the tweaks? Are there any in the actual

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

If each project picks a style and sticks to it, then archetypes are appropriate. On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Patrick Sansoucy wrote: > Re, > > Basically, the end result would be to support multiple teams with multiple > web application servers and setup (shared

Re: Maven profiles vs Archetypes

What if your profiles lived in a couple of parent POMs, and the child POMs inherited from the appropriate parent POMs? We use this setup for many of our projects. It avoids child POM bloat and lets us update the shared logic without pushing changes to every project. Only limitation is that