I wasn't attacking your opinion or your credentials. The lack of detailed justification for statements simply made me question how applicable they were to me (and others). As such, I wanted to provide another point of view.
Granted, the Maven jobs hide a lot of what they are doing so if your project does things that break the assumptions made by these jobs, then debugging it is probably challenging. In my projects, I try to follow the KISS principle in designing and implementing my builds. I have yet to meet a project where the Maven job did not work for me unless I ran into a Maven bug/limitation (like MNG-5889). -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 9:39 AM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: Jenkins and Maven When they work, they work... when they don't work they blow up in your face... and they break how maven is supposed to work... so anyone that actually has a good understanding of Maven will be surprised by the evil things the evil one does... Having been a Jenkins committer since 2006, and given that my day job is actually developing Jenkins... feel free to take my opinions however you see fit On 13 October 2016 at 15:24, Robert Patrick <robert.patr...@oracle.com> wrote: > Well... Some of us, my team included, are using the Maven jobs in > Jenkins and they generally works fine for our projects (and is much > simpler to configure). Be warned that Maven 3.3 support is still > busted for projects that use .mvn/maven.config waiting on > https://issues.apache.org/ > jira/browse/MNG-5889 to be merged... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 9:16 AM > To: Maven Users List > Subject: Re: Jenkins and Maven > > https://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2013/11/jenkins- > maven-job-type-considered-evil.html > is the message from your friendly neighbourhood Apache Maven PMC > member and Jenkins committer! > > Two options: > 1. (oldschool) Freestyle Job with a Maven build step 2. (coolkids) > Multibranch Pipeline Job with a Jenkinsfile in the repository... At > present the Jenkinsfile will have to invoke Maven via a shell/batch > step... which gets a tad ugly > > node() { > withMaven(...) { > if (isUnix()) { > sh 'mvn clean verify' > } else { > bat 'mvn clean verify' > } > junit '**/target/surefire-reports/*.xml, **/target/failsafe-reports/*. > xml' > // plus whatever else you are having yourself > } > } > > There is a dedicated `mvn` step in the works... not here yet... and > there is a newer better syntax for Jenkinsfile in progress: > https://github.com/jenkinsci/pipeline-model-definition-plugin > > So hopefully, you'll soon be able to do > > pipeline { > agent label:'linux' > stages { > stage('Build') { > // the syntax to specify the Maven tool version is still in progress > steps { > mvn 'clean verify' > // remains to be seen if the `mvn` step will auto-junit > } > } > } > notifications { > always { > mail ... > } > } > } > > On 13 October 2016 at 14:59, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > We've about had it with bamboo, and are dusting off our old Jenkins > > instance. > > > > I recall some messages here about things _not_ to do with Jenkins > > and Maven. Do we avoid the 'maven build type' altogether and just > > run Maven from the shell, or is my memory faulty? Anything else. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
