[
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-201?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_116377
]
Nathan Beyer (Cerner) commented on MRELEASE-201:
------------------------------------------------
+1 for ALWAYS including an XML prolog that includes the encoding.
Since the POM file are often retrieve via HTTP, the lack of the encoding in the
POM can be even more troublesome, as the encoding can be determined by the
transport [1] if it's not in the XML prolog, so the "default" of UTF-8 doesn't
always apply. This means that the encoding maybe determined by default
content-type values set in the web server's configuration. This adds a
significant amount of variability, which would be eliminated by explicitly
setting the encoding in the prolog.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/#sec-prolog-dtd
> Deployed POM is not valid XML
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: MRELEASE-201
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-201
> Project: Maven 2.x Release Plugin
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Joerg Schaible
> Attachments: MNG-2362.zip
>
>
> If the POM has utf-8 encoding and you make usage of entities to support
> extended characters, these characters are no longer encoded as entities in
> the repository (well, the effect is already visible in
> target/effective-pom.xml). This is not a rule of general, POMs with packaging
> "pom" are installed and deployed correctly.
> Multi module example. The attached archive contains a parent POM and a POM
> for a jar. Both UTF-8 encoded POMs contain a developer with a name using an
> entitiy. Releasing the POMs they are written with the expanded entitiy making
> the XML invalid.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
