Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Hi,
i've found a little issue based on an incompatibiliry of MVN 2.0.10/9
and MVN 2.1
I've defined some properties in my settings.xml:
homeoffice
devn-oracle-test
and based on that in my profiles.xml in the project there will be set
some properties:
devn-oracle-test
...
..
...
So in my pom.xml file:
<...>
${database.pom.groupId}...
...
...
...
${database.pom.groupId}...
In MVN 2.1 the build (or mvn install) will fail and in mvn 2.0.[9,10] it
works
So may be i oversight something or am i'm doing things wrong ?
In MVN 2.1 is the settings.xml of the user not read ?
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
--
SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893
Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029
Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579
52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
RE: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
The war plugin is introduced by the lifecycle. The mappings are dependent on the packaging type. More info is available here: http://www.sonatype.com/books/maven-book/reference/simple-project-sect-l ifecycle.html -Original Message- From: Pankaj Tandon [mailto:pankajtan...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 11:17 AM To: users@maven.apache.org Subject: Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released Rob and Brian, Thanks for the response. However, how then does the maven-war-plugin run. I do NOT specify an execution section for that plugin, and it runs in the package phase. So I am not sure why is it necessary to mention the execution element at all (with or without a phase). Just the plugin with a generic configuration node should do. Still confused, Pankaj > you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that invkes this plugin. That's right, except you don't have to specify the phase - the one declared by the mojo will be assumed. 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > Hello Rob, > I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if > you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have to > declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that > invkes this plugin. > > That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in > the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other > plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). > > So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? > > Thanks > Pankaj > > > Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my > path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment > variable. > > Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why > my > goal was being ignored. > > And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' > annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you > still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can > confirm that this works fine. > > Many thanks to Brett for asistance. > > Rob > > 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > > > As in a block in the pom.xml of > > the jar-packaged project? > > > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > > > >> > >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > >> > >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? > >>> > >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar > >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals > >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. > >>> > >> > >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is > >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. > >> > >> How have you constructed your execution block? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Brett > >> > >> -- > >> Brett Porter > >> br...@apache.org > >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > >> > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Rob, Lafros.com -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575805.html Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Rob, Thanks! That clarifies things. Pankaj Sorry, I should have added that the element is only required if the goal is not one of those in the lifecycle (corresponding to the packaging type). 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > Rob and Brian, > Thanks for the response. However, how then does the maven-war-plugin run. I > do NOT specify an execution section for that plugin, and it runs in the > package phase. > So I am not sure why is it necessary to mention the execution element at > all (with or without a phase). Just the plugin with a generic configuration > node should do. > > Still confused, > Pankaj > > > > you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase > in > the project that invkes this plugin. > > That's right, except you don't have to specify the phase - the one declared > by the mojo will be assumed. > > 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > > > > Hello Rob, > > I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if > > you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have > to > > declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that > > invkes this plugin. > > > > That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in > > the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other > > plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). > > > > So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? > > > > Thanks > > Pankaj > > > > > > Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my > > path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment > > variable. > > > > Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why > > my > > goal was being ignored. > > > > And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase > prepare-package' > > annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you > > still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can > > confirm that this works fine. > > > > Many thanks to Brett for asistance. > > > > Rob > > > > 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > > > > > As in a block in the pom.xml > of > > > the jar-packaged project? > > > > > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase > prepare-package'. > > > > > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > > > > > > >> > > >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > > >> > > >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? > > >>> > > >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar > > >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in > goals > > >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. > > >>> > > >> > > >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there > is > > >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. > > >> > > >> How have you constructed your execution block? > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Brett > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Brett Porter > > >> br...@apache.org > > >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > >> > > >> > > >> - > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html > > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > -- > Rob, Lafros.com > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575805.html > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Rob, Lafros.com -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2576052.html Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Sorry, I should have added that the element is only required if the goal is not one of those in the lifecycle (corresponding to the packaging type). 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > Rob and Brian, > Thanks for the response. However, how then does the maven-war-plugin run. I > do NOT specify an execution section for that plugin, and it runs in the > package phase. > So I am not sure why is it necessary to mention the execution element at > all (with or without a phase). Just the plugin with a generic configuration > node should do. > > Still confused, > Pankaj > > > > you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase > in > the project that invkes this plugin. > > That's right, except you don't have to specify the phase - the one declared > by the mojo will be assumed. > > 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > > > > Hello Rob, > > I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if > > you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have > to > > declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that > > invkes this plugin. > > > > That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in > > the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other > > plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). > > > > So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? > > > > Thanks > > Pankaj > > > > > > Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my > > path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment > > variable. > > > > Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why > > my > > goal was being ignored. > > > > And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase > prepare-package' > > annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you > > still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can > > confirm that this works fine. > > > > Many thanks to Brett for asistance. > > > > Rob > > > > 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > > > > > As in a block in the pom.xml > of > > > the jar-packaged project? > > > > > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase > prepare-package'. > > > > > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > > > > > > >> > > >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > > >> > > >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? > > >>> > > >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar > > >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in > goals > > >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. > > >>> > > >> > > >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there > is > > >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. > > >> > > >> How have you constructed your execution block? > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Brett > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Brett Porter > > >> br...@apache.org > > >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > >> > > >> > > >> - > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html > > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > -- > Rob, Lafros.com > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575805.html > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Rob, Lafros.com
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Rob and Brian, Thanks for the response. However, how then does the maven-war-plugin run. I do NOT specify an execution section for that plugin, and it runs in the package phase. So I am not sure why is it necessary to mention the execution element at all (with or without a phase). Just the plugin with a generic configuration node should do. Still confused, Pankaj > you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that invkes this plugin. That's right, except you don't have to specify the phase - the one declared by the mojo will be assumed. 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > Hello Rob, > I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if > you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have to > declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that > invkes this plugin. > > That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in > the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other > plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). > > So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? > > Thanks > Pankaj > > > Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my > path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment > variable. > > Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why > my > goal was being ignored. > > And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' > annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you > still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can > confirm that this works fine. > > Many thanks to Brett for asistance. > > Rob > > 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > > > As in a block in the pom.xml of > > the jar-packaged project? > > > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > > > >> > >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > >> > >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? > >>> > >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar > >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals > >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. > >>> > >> > >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is > >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. > >> > >> How have you constructed your execution block? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Brett > >> > >> -- > >> Brett Porter > >> br...@apache.org > >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > >> > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Rob, Lafros.com -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575805.html Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
RE: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
The @phase will automatically cause a plugin to run at that phase, but the plugin must still be mentioned in the pom. -Original Message- From: Pankaj Tandon [mailto:pankajtan...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:40 AM To: users@maven.apache.org Subject: Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released Hello Rob, I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that invkes this plugin. That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? Thanks Pankaj Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment variable. Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why my goal was being ignored. And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can confirm that this works fine. Many thanks to Brett for asistance. Rob 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > As in a block in the pom.xml of > the jar-packaged project? > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > >> >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: >> >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? >>> >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. >>> >> >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. >> >> How have you constructed your execution block? >> >> Cheers, >> Brett >> >> -- >> Brett Porter >> br...@apache.org >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
> you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that invkes this plugin. That's right, except you don't have to specify the phase - the one declared by the mojo will be assumed. 2009/4/2 Pankaj Tandon > > Hello Rob, > I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if > you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have to > declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that > invkes this plugin. > > That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in > the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other > plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). > > So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? > > Thanks > Pankaj > > > Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my > path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment > variable. > > Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why > my > goal was being ignored. > > And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' > annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you > still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can > confirm that this works fine. > > Many thanks to Brett for asistance. > > Rob > > 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > > > As in a block in the pom.xml of > > the jar-packaged project? > > > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > > > >> > >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > >> > >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? > >>> > >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar > >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals > >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. > >>> > >> > >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is > >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. > >> > >> How have you constructed your execution block? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Brett > >> > >> -- > >> Brett Porter > >> br...@apache.org > >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > >> > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html > Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Rob, Lafros.com
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Hello Rob, I wanted to ask you about your comment below where you state that even if you have an annotation in a mojo for the execution phase, you still have to declare an executions element for the very same phase in the project that invkes this plugin. That, kind of defeats the purpose of having a default phase specified in the Mojo, does it not? And it certainly doesn't work that way for other plugins (the war plugin for instance that is bound to the package phase). So am I missing something here or is this a bug introduced with 2.0.10? Thanks Pankaj Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment variable. Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why my goal was being ignored. And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can confirm that this works fine. Many thanks to Brett for asistance. Rob 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > As in a block in the pom.xml of > the jar-packaged project? > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > >> >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: >> >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? >>> >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. >>> >> >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. >> >> How have you constructed your execution block? >> >> Cheers, >> Brett >> >> -- >> Brett Porter >> br...@apache.org >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp2515975p2575576.html Sent from the maven users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Okay, my mistake - although it was indeed the 2.1.0 mvn which was in my path, I had forgotten to change the value of my M2_HOME environment variable. Therefore, it was actually 2.0.10 which was being executed, which was why my goal was being ignored. And anyway, I had wrongly assumed that adding the '@phase prepare-package' annotation to the mojo was enough to trigger the goal's execution - you still have to add a ... to the pom, and I can confirm that this works fine. Many thanks to Brett for asistance. Rob 2009/3/25 Rob Dickens > As in a block in the pom.xml of > the jar-packaged project? > > There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. > > 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > >> >> On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: >> >> Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? >>> >>> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar >>> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals >>> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. >>> >> >> All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is >> no default binding in any of the mojos yet. >> >> How have you constructed your execution block? >> >> Cheers, >> Brett >> >> -- >> Brett Porter >> br...@apache.org >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> >
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
As in a block in the pom.xml of the jar-packaged project? There isn't one, since the plugin's mojo has a '@phase prepare-package'. 2009/3/25 Brett Porter > > > On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: > > Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? >> >> Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar >> packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals >> declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. >> > > All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is no > default binding in any of the mojos yet. > > How have you constructed your execution block? > > Cheers, > Brett > > -- > Brett Porter > br...@apache.org > http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
On 25/03/2009, at 10:07 PM, Rob Dickens wrote: Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. All packaging types will if you properly bind to the phase, but there is no default binding in any of the mojos yet. How have you constructed your execution block? Cheers, Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Do jar-packaged projects now execute the new prepare-package phase? Have just tried the new version out, hoping that my project with jar packaging would execute the new phase, to which one of my plug-in goals declares itself as being bound, but it appears not to. Thanks, 2009/3/22 John Casey > The Maven team is pleased to announce the release of Maven 2.1.0. > > Maven is a software project management and comprehension tool. Based on the > concept of a project object model (POM), Maven can manage a project's build, > reporting and documentation from a central piece of information. > > You can download the new version at: > > http://maven.apache.org/download.html > > You can find release notes for this version below, or at: > > > http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&styleName=Html&version=14587 > > Enjoy, > > -The Maven team > -- Rob, Lafros.com
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
On 22/03/2009, at 11:50 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: But on the other hand the web-site does not say a word about that ... http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Profiles to be more accurate they are simply wrong, cause they are using: Sure - please submit a JIRA ticket for the issue, and if you can later patch against the APT documentation for that file. A little difference has been comming up: MVN 2.1.0 prints out a warning about an non activated profile and about not configured copying encoding (build is platform dependent) But based on the above changes the build is working under MVN 2.1 and MVN 2.0.9... These are just warnings. The first is because you used a -P argument that was never actually activated because the profile doesn't exist. The second comes from the resources plugin I think and indicates you may get different build results on different machines if they have a different system encoding. - Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
My apologies, I just assumed the RCs were announced on the user list. I see now they weren't so that's our fault. We'll announce the RCs on the user list when we get near the cycle next time. On 22-Mar-09, at 9:57 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: Hi Jason, This is why we really encourage people to participate in the RCs. We had about 20 in total and we would have been able to do something for you if you participated earlier. If the RC's have been announced on the Users list it might work...but from October last year (2008) till now (my own archive) no announcements have been made on the users list about Maven 2.1.0 RC's ? I checked the online archive as well...couldn't find an entry...in the same time range.. On the users list there is an entry on November 2008 about 2.0.10 RC and in December on 2.0.10 RC...but not for 2.1... May be i oversight something I found an entry on 19. september 2008 about 2.1.0-M1 ? http://www.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-M1-Released-td19565710.html#a19565710 On the developers list if have many more entries on 2.1.0... We still can, but we could have fixed it before it went into a release. I think the quality of Maven has gone up exponentially since Brian introduced the mandatory RC cycles but it's only as a good as the amount of participation we get. I know...i'm participating many open source projects ...like Tika, Subversion and so on But the problem i had was not really a problem of Maven 2.1 is was more a problem of minecause now it checks better the POM to it's associated DTD...and complains of wrong entries or order... But it might be good idea to create a User handleable change log instead of just JIRA entries...e.g. describe the consequences of changes BTW: I'm willing to help in any way i can...testing...writing docs/ update docs.. etc. just drop an email to me Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction. -- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kurosawa - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Hi Jason, This is why we really encourage people to participate in the RCs. We had about 20 in total and we would have been able to do something for you if you participated earlier. If the RC's have been announced on the Users list it might work...but from October last year (2008) till now (my own archive) no announcements have been made on the users list about Maven 2.1.0 RC's ? I checked the online archive as well...couldn't find an entry...in the same time range.. On the users list there is an entry on November 2008 about 2.0.10 RC and in December on 2.0.10 RC...but not for 2.1... May be i oversight something I found an entry on 19. september 2008 about 2.1.0-M1 ? http://www.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-M1-Released-td19565710.html#a19565710 On the developers list if have many more entries on 2.1.0... We still can, but we could have fixed it before it went into a release. I think the quality of Maven has gone up exponentially since Brian introduced the mandatory RC cycles but it's only as a good as the amount of participation we get. I know...i'm participating many open source projects ...like Tika, Subversion and so on But the problem i had was not really a problem of Maven 2.1 is was more a problem of minecause now it checks better the POM to it's associated DTD...and complains of wrong entries or order... But it might be good idea to create a User handleable change log instead of just JIRA entries...e.g. describe the consequences of changes BTW: I'm willing to help in any way i can...testing...writing docs/update docs.. etc. just drop an email to me Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
This is why we really encourage people to participate in the RCs. We had about 20 in total and we would have been able to do something for you if you participated earlier. We still can, but we could have fixed it before it went into a release. I think the quality of Maven has gone up exponentially since Brian introduced the mandatory RC cycles but it's only as a good as the amount of participation we get. On 22-Mar-09, at 3:55 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: Hi there, i have tried to run MVN 2.1 on an working MVN 2.0.9 build... and it failed... I got messages about not recognised tag "timezone" in the POM.. which is part of .. +1 ... But i haven't found any hint about this change ? May be i oversight things ? The full pom ist available from here: http://www.supose.org/repositories/entry/supose/trunk/pom.xml Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Hi Benjamin, As per MNG-3645, the model is parsed in strict mode and is not a valid child element of , it's a child of . many thanks for the hint...fixed... But now i'm running into a different problem, cause my profiles.xml files does not work...The message says "Expected root element 'profilesXml' but found 'project' ... Hm... I've found MNG-2605, MNG-3641, MNG-3933 about profiles, but no hint about that change... So i have taken a look into MNG-3933 where a and used that in my build and that has worked... But on the other hand the web-site does not say a word about that ... http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Profiles to be more accurate they are simply wrong, cause they are using: But based on the above changes the build is working under MVN 2.1 and MVN 2.0.9... Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > I got messages about not recognised tag "timezone" in the POM.. > which is part of > >.. > > > > +1 > As per MNG-3645, the model is parsed in strict mode and is not a valid child element of , it's a child of . Benjamin -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-ANN--Maven-2.1.0-Released-tp22643294p22645419.html Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [ANN] Maven 2.1.0 Released
Hi there, i have tried to run MVN 2.1 on an working MVN 2.0.9 build... and it failed... I got messages about not recognised tag "timezone" in the POM.. which is part of .. +1 ... But i haven't found any hint about this change ? May be i oversight things ? The full pom ist available from here: http://www.supose.org/repositories/entry/supose/trunk/pom.xml Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
