The "pom" packaging is no related to the assembly, but to the use of modules : I can't refer to a POM as parent from modules if it isn't pakaged as "pom".
Another solution I will try is to create a 3d module that handles the assembly creation and is packaged as "jar". I can then deploy this POM for my all-in-one jar. I'll have to deploy the "parent" POM and the "assembly" POM with my assembly JAR. Will try this and post back the result of my experiment. 2006/12/14, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 12/14/06, nicolas de loof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could you please explain me what's the difference with using an assembly ? > > I've setup an assembly that creates a Jar with all classes from my two > modules. The resulting Jar is fine according to my goal of a single artifact > from tow maven modules. > > This doesn't solve the issue that the deployed POM is set with packaging > "pom". I could use XSLT to convert the POM to "jar" packaging prior to > deploy. I haven't tried this, but I'd think that using the dependency plugin, you could still use 'jar' packaging, so the usual install and deploy phases would work more naturally. But, what happens if you use a packaging type of 'jar' for your pom with the assembly plugin? Have you bound the assembly creation to a lifecycle phase? -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
