On 13 November 2010 01:44, Christopher Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jason, > > Thanks for the reply. > > In effect then, Plexus lives; at least in terms of developing Mojos. I > suppose I thought that the idea was to ultimately de-couple from Plexus. > It is decoupled under the covers, but we use a compatibility layer to support legacy Mojos so that people's builds continue to work This gives us a bit of breathing space to test out new plugin APIs / annotations (based on JSR330) without breaking existing plugins Hopefully the new plugin API will last some time so we want to make sure it's simple, useable, and understandable :) > In my perfect world, I'd prefer to leverage JSR-330 knowledge and not have > to do with Plexus at all when writing Mojos. There's enough out there to > learn without another container, and I think that having to learn Plexus > impacts on who writes Mojos. > > May be in a year or so when M3 is widely adopted, this will be less of a > concern. > > Kind regards, > Christopher > > On 10/11/2010, at 7:45 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > On Nov 10, 2010, at 12:46 AM, Christopher Hunt wrote: > > > >> Thanks Oliver. > >> > >> I think that it'll be quite a while before people write MOJOs just for > Maven 3. From my own perspective having just written two new MOJOs, I'd like > to be able to write for the future but recognise the present. It'd be great > to use @inject in my code now and then use the MOJO with Maven 2. Not > possible? > >> > > > > Not impossible, but a huge amount of work to get to work in Maven2 and > I'm not aware of anyone doing any work in this area to make JSR-330 work in > Maven 2. But it's definitely within the realm of possibility in Maven 3. > > > > -- Cheers, Stuart
