[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17908736#comment-17908736 ]
Herve Boutemy commented on MNG-7832: ------------------------------------ > For the others I think it is fine to require consumers to load the related > plugin with extensions = true. a plugin is generally to produce an artifact now, a consumer will add a plugin to consume the artifact? strange can we share a concrete example, because having the same discussion for years, I feel we miss concrete vision of concrete case > revert artifact handlers move to plugins > ---------------------------------------- > > Key: MNG-7832 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7832 > Project: Maven > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Dependencies, Plugins and Lifecycle > Reporter: Herve Boutemy > Assignee: Herve Boutemy > Priority: Major > > MNG-5697 proposed to move at the same time packaging mapping AND artifact > handlers to packaging-oriented plugins > packaging mapping is feasible, and can make sense: user configures a > packaging plugin in his pom.xml to benefit from the full associated build > lifecycle, why not > but attifact handler is completely another beast: it's about consuming an > artifact as a dependency, then not lead at all by the packaging of the > project consuming the artifacts as dependencies > https://maven.apache.org/ref/3.9.3/maven-core/artifact-handlers.html > we need to split the 2 aspects: > 1. finish lifecycle mapping definition to plugins, and remove at the end the > definition from core, while learning users how to not any more benefit from > implicit core definition > 2. revert artifact handlers copy to packaging plugins, because they create > confusion: artifacts will never be consumed with an artifact handler defined > by an associated packaging plugin > once someone finds something reasonable about artifact handlers, we can > implement it later -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)