I don't understand. 
 
 Is it something you want to do and ask me if I have already done or is it a 
suggestion on how to solve my problem?
 
 In any case, my point was that I didn't want to force the developers to put 
user/project properties in their settings.xml because I think that settings.xml 
is mostly used for settings that could be shared accross projects.
 
 For example, I have a project that needs during, the test phase to use a jdbc 
connection. This jdbc connection is obviously specific to the user (we don't 
want to use a remote database for testing) but it is also specific to the 
project so I don't think the connection properties should be part of the 
settings.xml.
 
 As I wrote in another reply, I found some kind of solution by having my 
pom.xml have a "user-pom.xml"  file as its parent. This user-pom.xml contains 
the properties that need to be customized by each individual developer.
 

Mike Lantink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
Did you ever try having the profile set a value in the settings.xml like 
localRepository ? So a developer could set his local repsoitory as part of his 
profile ? 

Michael Lantink
Software Engineer 
(519) 880-2400 ext 2765
www.sandvine.com


-----Original Message-----
From: mvdp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 2:25 PM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: RE: [m2] Properties files



Hi Oscar,

I faced the same problem. I "solved" it by using a profile wich has
properties with valus to be configured by the
developer in settings.xml.

See
http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-profiles.html

The profile is enabled using

  aProfileName


because  is not working yet.

Martin

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Oscar Picasso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: donderdag 24 november 2005 17:44
Aan: [email protected]
Onderwerp: [m2] Properties files


Hi,

 In m1 we could use user specific properties in the pom and these properties
could be read from some properties files.

 What is the similar functionality in m2?

 Here is what I have found that is somewhat related
 - you can user -Dsome.property=some.value => It doesn't use a file.
 - setting.xml for user specification configuration => you cannot use it to
set arbitrary properties for a specific pom.
 - filtering => it allows to set properties to resources but not to poms.
 - using the pom's properties element => the properties are set in the pom
itself, which is what I want to avoid.
 - same as above, but move all the user specific properties in a parent pom
that could be customized by each user
 The later approach seems to me the closest to the m1 user specific
properties files. I would however prefer a simpler properties file instead
of an xml (pom) file.

 I am under the impression that I miss something.

 What is the right to do it?


 Thanks


 Oscar

---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply via email to