On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Haszlakiewicz, Eric <ehas...@transunion.com> wrote: >>-----Original Message----- >>From: anders.g.ham...@gmail.com [mailto:anders.g.ham...@gmail.com] On >> >>The pattern I was talking about was all the issues Philip runs into as > he >>was trying to not follow the Maven way. > > So, again, I ask: what IS the pattern? What IS the "Maven way" in this > situation? It is not at all clear. > You're claiming he's not following it, but you haven't explained just > what it is about what he is doing that you think deviates from the way > things are supposed to work.
Yeah, part of the problem is I still haven't got this working with a "parent" pom, and I don't even know exactly what is meant by a parent pom (I assume it was using the <parent> tag, but I'm running into issues there...) I do appreciate everyone's responses, and I do want to follow the "Maven way" as much as possible, but I also want to avoid making things more difficult for no reason. I am getting a better picture now of how many feel it is good to have the default deploy location in a pom somewhere, but I still haven't been convinced that it is absolutely necessity, and I'm not sure it is worth dealing with the hassle when moving the repository to a new server. I'll play with it some more to see if I can get it working. But at the moment I'm still leaning towards just putting a property in settings.xml, since that seems easy and I don't see any problem. And as long as I use the activatedProfiles instead of activateByDefault (as Arnaud suggested) I can avoid the issue of that profile not being active. Phillip --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
