psiroky commented on code in PR #211:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-enforcer/pull/211#discussion_r1059116774
##########
maven-enforcer-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugins/enforcer/EnforceMojo.java:
##########
@@ -127,10 +127,12 @@ public class EnforceMojo extends AbstractMojo {
private PlexusConfiguration rules;
/**
- * List of strings that matches the EnforcerRules to execute.
+ * List of strings that matches the EnforcerRules to execute. Replacement
for the <code>rules</code> property.
+ *
+ * @since 3.2.0
*/
- @Parameter(required = false, property = "rules")
- private List<String> commandLineRules;
+ @Parameter(required = false, property = "enforcer.rules")
Review Comment:
Yeah, I thought about is from the other fields (with `@Parameter`) point of
view. And the other setter is just a glue to support the deprecated parameter.
But it does not really matter that much. I moved the annotation to the setter.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
