On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd like to submit the concept that distributionManagement has > something in common with repositories. Here's the common event that > leads me to think about this: > > 1. Find a useful open source component. > 2. Discover that it has a missing feature or a bug(let) that gets in > the way of what I want to do. > 3. Submit to owner, meanwhile ... > 4. Want to make release into my own infrastructure of fork while > waiting a long time for owner to absorb and release. > Step 4 has always felt to me like much too much work. mvn versions:set -DnewVersion=1.1-mycompany-01 && mvn clean javadoc:har source:jar deploy -DaltDeploymentUrl=my-Id::default::my-url && mvn versions:revert Ok so it's a long command line, but really not that much work at the end of they day. I did it 4 times last month If it's entirely > my infrastructure, I need to diddle with scm, distributionManagement, > url, and version. If I am actually making a public fork, then I've got > the groupId (and perhaps the package) to deal with. This case, > however, is outside of the scope of this message. > > I've mulled over a maven-fork-plugin that would pom-edit for this > purpose, but I've also wondered about the subject line of this > message: should _all_ the information that concerns 'extrinsic' > infrastructure be factored in some way that makes all this trivial? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] <javascript:;> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] <javascript:;> > > -- Sent from my phone
