I _think_ I solved this - but I can't tell if I'm leveraging what may seem
like a bug lol.

I used this:

                <executions>
                    <execution>
                        <id>default-war</id>  <------------------
                        <!-- this is where I'm stuck - seems like no matter
what I do, war is built twice -->
                        <phase>package</phase>
                        <goals>
                            <goal>${war.goal}</goal>
                        </goals>
                <configuration>

Now it only runs once :-)

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Maven User <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all -
>
> I _swore_ you could do this, but maybe I've overlooked something...
>
> I have a project that has a packaging type of "war".  BUT - we have two
> ways we'd like to build - a compressed war (if releaseable) or an exploded
> directory (if it's a developer build).
>
> I'm doing this:
>
> .....
>             <plugin>
>                 <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>                 <artifactId>maven-war-plugin</artifactId>
>                 <executions>
>                     <execution>
>                         <id>war</id>
>                         <!-- this is where I'm stuck - seems like no
> matter what I do, war is built twice -->
>                         <phase>package</phase>
>                         <goals>
>                             <goal>${war.goal}</goal>
>                         </goals>
>                         <configuration>
>
>                          <whole mess of overlays here>
> .....
>
> If the exploded option is specified, the place where we're actually
> combining things is directly in the container's webapp dir.
>
> What happens now is if I leave this phase set to package, I can see the
> war plugin called twice:
>
> [INFO] --- maven-war-plugin:2.1.1:war (default-war) @
> ....
> [INFO] --- maven-war-plugin:2.1.1:war (war) @
>
> I want to skip that "default-war" one and just do the "war" one or
> whatever eliminates ONE of these steps.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>

Reply via email to