> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michal Maczka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 07 November 2003 19:36
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: RE: war plugin : [maven.caller.call.compile-java] is not
defined
[snip]
> That in goal "war:init":
>
>
> <goal name="war:init"
> description="Initialize the file system and attain any necessary
> goals">
>
> <ant:available property="webSourcesPresent" type="dir"
> file="${maven.war.src}"/>
>
> <j:if test="${sourcesPresent == 'true'}">
> <caller:call goalInterface="compile-java"/>
> <attainGoal name="test:test"/>
> </j:if>
>
> <ant:property name="maven.war.final.name"
> value="${pom.artifactId}.war"/>
>
> </goal>
>
> There should be no call to caller plugin
>
>
> just something like
>
> <j:if test="${sourcesPresent == 'true'}">
> <atainGoal name="xxxxx:compile"/> (e.g
xxxxx:compile=java:compile)
> <attainGoal name="test:test"/>
> </j:if>
>
> and it should be up to (just an example - I am not imposing anything)
> "java"
> plugin to handle this call (In place of WKG there will be WKG in Well
Know
> Plugin).
I would not like at all that the java plugin has to know about all the
other plugins (like the aspectj plugin, the xdoc plugin, etc).
If we have:
<j:if test="${sourcesPresent == 'true'}">
<atainGoal name="xxxxx:compile"/> (e.g
xxxxx:compile=java:compile)
<attainGoal name="test:test"/>
</j:if>
And if there is some interception, then it is *very* misleading because
the reader will think the java plugin will be called but in practice it
will be some other plugin's goal.
I definitely prefer the notion of common interfaces (WKG). It seems
logical to me that the war plugin would use one WKG for compilation.
> It's like you are looking up "well know" service (interface) and call
it
> while with caller plugin it's like you are looking up the name of the
> service before calling it.
> (I hope that difference is clear)
No... Either I don't understand or I don't agree... :-)
>
> So as a consequnce (as I see it) war plugin should not depend on
"caller
> plugin" and we should put inside "java" plugin a logic which binds a
call
> to
> "compile"
> goal to particual executor.
-1, unless I understand what you're saying... ;-)
My internal logic tells me that it's always high in the chain that you
make choices about different implementations to use and not the other
way around.
What do others think? Am I really dumb and not understanding what our
friend Michal is saying?
Thanks
-Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
