[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MDEPLOY-131?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15931934#comment-15931934
]
Richard Sand commented on MDEPLOY-131:
--------------------------------------
Hi Karl - my customers are using COTS products and often don't even have
in-house Java developers. They don't know or care what slf4j is. If you want to
tell them to read the slf4j docs feel free to :-).
But to answer your question, yes I am using 3 different executions of shade,
install-file, and deploy-file in my POM to build the different variations of
the main artifact.
I am truly baffled by the maven project's philosophy that it is not acceptable
for organizations to use maven tools as those orgs see fit. I've hit this
barrier before in the maven community with something as trivial as adding a
"skip" parameter to one of the few plugin goals that actually didn't have one.
Instead of looking at the feature at face value and deciding if it is useful,
instead the response is "well why do you need that? stop doing things the way
you are and instead do them as we prescribe".
I avoid multi-module projects whenever I can. My company has used maven
exclusively for its projects since 2010. I invite you to take over writing and
maintaining all of our POMs, documenting them, educating our developers, etc.
Would you do that for me? :-)
Otherwise, can you tell me why you would reject this patch on its face value,
rather than making me justify why I'd dare ask about it and submit such a patch?
I've never opened an issue on Jira simply asking for some feature - every
ticket I've opened over the years has been accompanied by a patch. I don't
expect others to just do work for me - I contribute where I can. I follow every
e-mail on the maven-dev and users list. I know the hell that the project has
gone through with 3.4/3.5 and some of the soul-searching that has gone on
within the maven team. I love this tool, but I think the maven team killing
itself by trying to dictate to users the one-and-only way it should be used,
and rejecting updates by telling users they can re-tool how they do things
rather than accept a 10-line patch. I've contributed to other open source
projects in the past, including Apache projects, and never had such negativity
towards submissions. I truly do not understand it. Maybe the "silence" on the
Jira isn't a good thing?
I now maintain 4 different plugins in my company's repo for trivial patches
that make our company's maven implementation stronger, but I've given up
getting dragged into philosophical arguments and having to justify how we've
done things. Sorry for the rant.
-Richard
> use default repository when no url specified
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MDEPLOY-131
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MDEPLOY-131
> Project: Maven Deploy Plugin
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: deploy:deploy-file
> Reporter: raymond domingo
> Labels: contributers-welcome
> Attachments: DeployFileMojo.java,
> maven-deploy-useProjectRepo-20170319.patch, patch_deploy_file_mojo.diff
>
>
> When using the deploy goal there is no need to specify the url of the
> repository.
> When using deploy-file you DO need to specify the url. This is a problem,
> because during development I like to deploy to snapshot repository and when
> releasing i deploy to release repository and I can't add this logic to the
> pom.
> Thas is why I like the url paramter to become optional (backwards compatible)
> and add default behaviour when it is null. It should just like the deploy
> plugin use the default repository. Snapshot for snapshots and release for
> none snapshot versions.
> I added a patch file fixing this.
> I also added complete source of patched Mojo
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
