-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 No one is saying you have to follow the party line here. You're free to develop your own maven plugins to solve any problem you like, even run your toaster if you want. Maven will load your plugin, provided you add your groupId to the list of pluginGroups in the settings.xml. We just don't want to be in the business of building a tool to allow non-build activities, because it muddies up our concept of what's really involved with building software. There are multiple boundary considerations for this process, where integrating with maven makes sense, but let's be frank here...they aren't really _build_ process activities.
If you're forced to run unit tests via a main() invocation, why not write a unit-test plugin that calls this type of test, and formats errors/output so it can be integrated into the unit tests reporting features, rather than write a plugin that's sole aim is one-off, custom configuration on a per-POM basis, and has no hope of ever being reusable or scalable? I guess I don't understand what's wrong with writing mojos to wrap specific command-line-driven use cases...? - -john Wendell Beckwith wrote: | Probably because I'm not aware of what your talking about. Nonetheless, | while there may be another way of doing what I need, the ability to simple | specify a command line to a java process that is something that has | tremendous capability. Can users overdo it sure, but in an effort to protect | clueless users from themselves, should we prevent more advances users/plugin | developers from achieving their needs. I'm a big eclipse and firefox user, | but I don't dictate that everyone on my team has to do as I do because I | believe it is the "one true way" for IDEs and web browsing. | | Wb | | On 9/20/05, Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | |> |> |>>-----Original Message----- |>>From: Wendell Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>Sent: mardi 20 septembre 2005 19:15 |>>To: Maven Users List |>>Subject: Re: [m2] reasons for sticking with maven |>> |>>John is basically stating the very thing that I'm against in the |> |>statement |> |>>below. I have a 3rd party command line utility from |>>www.agitar.com <http://www.agitar.com><http://www.agitar.com>, |>>that basically does unit tests against our code. I want to write (and |> |>have |> |>>started writing) an M2 plugin to execute the java command line for the |>>agitation process from my plugin. All I need now to complete my plugin |>>besides more hours in a day is a plugin that will allow me to execute a |>>java |>>command line. Now my plugin will integrate with the maven lifecycle |> |>during |> |>>the test phase. However, first I'm told to use the maven-execute-plugin |>>and |>>then another dev states that it's bad and wants to see it eliminated, |> |>I'm |> |>>left thinking WTF!? This *helps* me adopt maven and the process, not |>>hinders |>>it. My whole purpose for writing the plugin was so that I could make the |>>plugin once and the other groups here and else where since I would open |>>source it would be able to reuse it. Is this not what maven is for? |> |>Just to muddy the waters: why don't you use commons-exec from your |>plugin's |>java code to execute your process? |> |>[snip] |> |>Thanks |>-Vincent |> |> |>--------------------------------------------------------------------- |>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> |> | | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDMEkBK3h2CZwO/4URAkV4AJ91AZVpovMtVrVziGZGb1dBKOQv2wCfSrY9 oShApxHT8sNeu/om38WwQKY= =kv4h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
