On Wednesday 17 December 2008 Trevor Harmon wrote: > On Dec 17, 2008, at 3:54 AM, Martin Höller wrote: > > And BTW: Maven's primary goal is to help building and packaging > > software, > > not starting the developed piece of software, so IMHO the exec- > > plugin is > > not a good example here. > > Well I have to disagree with you there. Testing is also not about > building and packaging software, yet Maven provides lots of support > for testing because it's such an integral part of the development > process.
What i meant with "building and packaging" included testing, so I think we could agree here rather than disagree. > Launching a desktop application that's being developed is > part of testing too. At least it's not automated testing, but we are getting off-topic here. Anyway, I didn't say don't use profiles. Actually I told you that I would use profiles in this special case. > Also, I don't want to maintain separate scripts in a separate language > just to launch an application. How would I make sure that the source > code has been compiled? How would I locate all the dependent JARs? > These problems are handled by the exec plugin, so I see no reason not > to use it just because profiles are "bad". Profiles are not bad, they are just not equals to ant tasks. > I simply want to keep everything contained within Maven, like I was > able to do with Ant. For example, in Ant I was able to define targets > like "run-test1" and "run-test2" that had dependencies on "compile" > and "jar". That way, whenever I ran either test, Ant would make sure > that the JAR was up to date with the latest code. I don't know of any > way to duplicate this functionality without using profiles. I still think the problem is that you are trying the solve your problems the ant way, but with maven as your tool. hth, - martin
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
