[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MWAR-448?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kari J. Niemi updated MWAR-448:
-------------------------------
Description:
I think we discovered a minor odd difference with war-packaging between "mvn
package" or "mvn install". We would expect that only difference between the two
is that the latter also installs the produced stuff in the local maven
repository.
We are packaging a few jars to a war. We have a parent pom with some modules,
and that is defined as a dependency in the pom.xml that produces a war-package.
Like this:
my-war-thingie:pom.xml (packaging:war)
* dependency: some-parent
some-parent:pom.xml (packaging:pom)
* module1 (packaging:jar)
* module2 (packaging:jar)
Earlier we had a different structure and everything was just fine: we did not
the have the child-modules but the parent-pom produced the jar. When we changed
the structure to the one described above: our CI was still OK, some developers
building OK as well -but some developers had failing maven builds because of
missing "some-parent.jar".
It was bit of devastating hunt, but finally we discovered that "mvn package"
was building OK, but "mvn install" looks for "some-parent.jar".
We don't actually mind if the above scenario would fail in both cases, or if it
was successful - we would just expect that it works the same way for both. If
this is intended behaviour, it would be nice to have it documented.
FWIW: in our case, we anyway wanted to define direct dependencies from the
war-packaging to the child-modules. So actually, we are OK wih our builds
already. But the difference caused so may doubts about our builds
reproducibility - and also, it seems like a bug - so I wanted to be good
citizen and report the problem.
Edit: further note from our troubleshooting sessions: we don't have the "type"
for the dependency at all in my-war-thingie:pom.xml. Yesterday, we did
experiment setting the type as "pom" -and as a consequence, both "mvn package"
and "mvn install" were successful. The default as we know, should/would be
"jar". Maybe the missing dependency type is for some odd reason resolved
differently for "maven package" and "maven install"?
was:
I think we discovered a minor odd difference with war-packaging between "mvn
package" or "mvn install". We would expect that only difference between the two
is that the latter also installs the produced stuff in the local maven
repository.
We are packaging a few jars to a war. We have a parent pom with some modules,
and that is defined as a dependency in the pom.xml that produces a war-package.
Like this:
my-war-thingie:pom.xml (packaging:war)
* dependency: some-parent
some-parent:pom.xml (packaging:pom)
* module1 (packaging:jar)
* module2 (packaging:jar)
Earlier we had a different structure and everything was just fine: we did not
the have the child-modules but the parent-pom produced the jar. When we changed
the structure to the one described above: our CI was still OK, some developers
building OK as well -but some developers had failing maven builds because of
missing "some-parent.jar".
It was bit of devastating hunt, but finally we discovered that "mvn package"
was building OK, but "mvn install" looks for "some-parent.jar".
We don't actually mind if the above scenario would fail in both cases, or if it
was successful - we would just expect that it works the same way for both. If
this is intended behaviour, it would be nice to have it documented.
FWIW: in our case, we anyway wanted to define direct dependencies from the
war-packaging to the child-modules. So actually, we are OK wih our builds
already. But the difference caused so may doubts about our builds
reproducibility - and also, it seems like a bug - so I wanted to be good
citizen and report the problem.
> packaging dependencies fails with "mvn install" but not "mvn package"
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MWAR-448
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MWAR-448
> Project: Maven WAR Plugin
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.3.2
> Environment: maven 3.6.3 ( later versions have bugs which we can't
> take in)
> Reporter: Kari J. Niemi
> Priority: Minor
>
> I think we discovered a minor odd difference with war-packaging between "mvn
> package" or "mvn install". We would expect that only difference between the
> two is that the latter also installs the produced stuff in the local maven
> repository.
>
> We are packaging a few jars to a war. We have a parent pom with some modules,
> and that is defined as a dependency in the pom.xml that produces a
> war-package. Like this:
> my-war-thingie:pom.xml (packaging:war)
> * dependency: some-parent
> some-parent:pom.xml (packaging:pom)
> * module1 (packaging:jar)
> * module2 (packaging:jar)
> Earlier we had a different structure and everything was just fine: we did not
> the have the child-modules but the parent-pom produced the jar. When we
> changed the structure to the one described above: our CI was still OK, some
> developers building OK as well -but some developers had failing maven builds
> because of missing "some-parent.jar".
>
> It was bit of devastating hunt, but finally we discovered that "mvn package"
> was building OK, but "mvn install" looks for "some-parent.jar".
> We don't actually mind if the above scenario would fail in both cases, or if
> it was successful - we would just expect that it works the same way for both.
> If this is intended behaviour, it would be nice to have it documented.
> FWIW: in our case, we anyway wanted to define direct dependencies from the
> war-packaging to the child-modules. So actually, we are OK wih our builds
> already. But the difference caused so may doubts about our builds
> reproducibility - and also, it seems like a bug - so I wanted to be good
> citizen and report the problem.
> Edit: further note from our troubleshooting sessions: we don't have the
> "type" for the dependency at all in my-war-thingie:pom.xml. Yesterday, we did
> experiment setting the type as "pom" -and as a consequence, both "mvn
> package" and "mvn install" were successful. The default as we know,
> should/would be "jar". Maybe the missing dependency type is for some odd
> reason resolved differently for "maven package" and "maven install"?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
