2009/3/16 Luke Patterson <lukewpatter...@gmail.com> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Stephen Connolly > <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK, so In am currenty performing a major refactoring of > > versions-maven-plugin... > > > > I'm looking for some feedback from anyone using this plugin.... > > ... > > At present all properties will be updated irrespective of where they > are... > > but I'm thinking this might not be quite so good an idea... > > > > the simplest solution for me is to update all properties in *active* > > profiles, and leave inactive profiles alone... this would also have the > side > > effect of not picking up associations from the inactive profiles... > > > > Has anyone any good objections to this approach? Or suggestions for > > alternative approaches? > > > > For profiles, maybe you can ... > > Allow a mode (some parameter switch?) where each profile must be > explicitly declared to be "included" or "not included" in the update. > Maybe a comma separated list with "!" for "not". > > If the user doesn't list all the available profiles when running the > goal, then the error message will include a nice > copy-and-paste-friendly version of the command with all profiles > listed. The user can then feed back in the list, excluding individual > profiles if they need to. > > Hmmmm, I like the cut of your jib...
so maybe what I do is add -DincludeProfiles=..... -DexcludeProfiles=..... Where includeProfiles can be used to add profiles that are not currently active into the mix (useful if you want to update the release profile for example) and excludeProfiles can be used to remove currently active profiles from the mix.... I guess a side effect is that dependencies not in an "active/included profile" will not be picked up as an association.... which is kind of what I think should happen > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
