See my comments inline below. On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 6:33 PM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > While I have no issue with the logic of what is being done I do object to using BeanShell to do it. This smacks of going back to Ant/Make and “rolling your own”. It is also way too tempting for people to just go and modify the script since it is right there in the pom. > > It also looks like the Script is basically Java code, so converting that to a Maven Plugin should be easy.
Let's assume we placed this logic into `logging-parent` POM (e.g., in a plugin `<execution>` with a dedicated ID) and other Java projects of ours using it (e.g., by binding the plugin execution to a certain Maven phase by referring to its ID). If one figures out a customization is needed to address a certain need, they can do two things: 1. [structural fix] adapt the BeanShell in `logging-parent` POM accordingly and cut a release 2. [temporary fix] copy-paste the BeanShell and fix it inline I suppose you are afraid of the latter. > The regex in the script is hard-coded. We also don’t currently include all the binaries produced (on purpose). As a Maven Plugin it would be easy to provide the configuration to supply/override the regex and to provide artifacts to exclude. It is trivial. We can put it in a Maven property, use the property in the script, and `logging-parent` POM consumers can simply override the property.
