On 20/04/2015 4:55 PM, Jim Klo wrote:
Comments inline below..
On Apr 20, 2015, at 10:44 AM, Ron Wheeler
<rwhee...@artifact-software.com
<mailto:rwhee...@artifact-software.com>> wrote:
RDF sounds like overkill. There is no reason why a comment could not
be a URI but I am not sure that you want to mandate that.
Use Case 1 link to web resource
<dependency comment="http://blog.artifact-software.com/tech/?p=191”>
Having dealt with this sort of thing on other projects, linked
comments sound good at first but ultimately become a very bad idea
IMO. This creates a non-idempotent and brittle link scenario where the
comment url is out of synch with the content in the POM.
Use Case 2 lots of in-line deatils
<dependency comment="added to support PDF output">
<groupId>org.apache.xmlgraphics</groupId>
<artifactId>fop</artifactId>
<version comment="Can't use version 2.x see
FOP-3423">1.0</version>
<optional comment="set to true to get text in black on
white">true</optional>
</dependency>
Use case 3 reference to a full explanation in the description
There is also the description tag which could be used to hold more
details
<dependency comment="See note 2 in description tag.”>
I’m not sure I’m seeing a difference between UC 2 & 3. Unless you mean
something more like this for UC 3:
<dependency comment_ref=“note2”> <!— or some XPath expression —>
...
<description comment_refid=“note2” comment=“This version doesn’t work
for the following reasons:….”>
I was thinking that the description might be <description>Note 1: Please
put all dependency versions in Parent, Note 2:FOP required for PDF
output</description>
IDE's could show comment attributes on tags in the POM editor or in
XML outline views.
It seems to be a lot more flexible than adding comment tags and
probably less intrusive to existing plug-ins.
I think comment tags should still be included. Inline is great for
short descriptions, but nothing really beats having a tag element that
doesn’t require a lot of XML escaping like an attribute would need.
- Jim
You are looking for a lot more machine processing that I was thinking.
I was just considering comments as a way to tell people about the
choices made.
Your XML escaping note is a good point.
The IDE will pick up invalid text so it should not be hard to avoid but
for people without a good IDE, they will get an error. It should only
happen once to each person editing a pom and POMs are not edited a lot
in most projects.
Can you give a comment tag solution for each of the use cases.
Are you proposing that comment tags be allowed inside all tags or just some.
I would suggest comment attributes on all elements.
Does anyone know what the impact would be of either solution on existing
poms or plug-ins?
Ron
Ron
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
