Well, we clearly disagree on whose "fault" it is at least. Declarative inputs and outputs also help with incremental builds (exactly what Takari built, but only serves within a plugin to know whether it should do real work or just be a no-op). Le 28 mars 2014 08:35, "mkarg" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Now I understand. The problem is that Maven does not know upfront that a > plugin *might* possibly produce an artifact. That is correct, obviously, > and > thank you for pointing me to that fact. > > So actually the only "correct" solution would be to write a set of plugins > and a workflow, e. g. a "PowerBuilder Workflow", provide new types like > <type>powerbuilder-exe</type> and <type>powerbuilder-resource-zip</type> > and > so on, and tell the plugins in their own code how to share information. > Understood. > > Thank you for your patience, now I know how a smart solution is to be > build. > AND I know that Maven is not the bad guy here, but it is our own laziness, > as we could simply write such a workflow! :-) > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/multi-module-phases-sequence-tp5789365p5789830.html > Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
