[
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPLUGIN-279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=359067#comment-359067
]
Michael Osipov edited comment on MPLUGIN-279 at 12/14/14 1:14 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
If I understood you correctly, this would solve exactly the corner case I have
described in the ticket: runtme evaluation?
Unfortunately, this only works for {{target}} what about source for
MJAVADOC-310? Moreover, have you though about [~rfscholte]'s
[comment|https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MJAVADOC-310?focusedCommentId=354200&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-354200]:
{quote}
In one of the Maven Hangouts we spent some time on this issue. Jason is very
clear about this: plugins should have no knowledge about each other. If there
are shared configuration-elements amongst plugins, then the pom.xml might need
to be enriched for such elements.
{quote}
The proposed fix actually violates that statement. Since plugins run in
isolated classloaders, shouldn't the config be isolated too?
{quote}
bq. How can I make use of that in MPIR and MPMD?
at the moment, copy/paste
{quote}
This is something I would like to avoid if there is no other solution. Copy and
paste ends in hell. No one will ever update the copied block.
I do not know whether the JDK requirement config already exists in the current
version but the configuration {{jdk}} as well as the [source
code|http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/plugin-tools/trunk/maven-plugin-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugin/plugin/PluginReport.java?view=markup#l664]
for is confusing. This does not indicate that some JDK version is required but
solely a JRE version. Only a few plugins really need the JDK. Produced
artifacts do not need the JDK at all.
was (Author: michael-o):
If I understood you correctly, this would solve exactly the corner case I have
described in the ticket: runtme evaluation?
Unfortunately, this only works for {{target}} what about source for
MJAVADOC-310? Moreover, have you though about [~rfscholte]'s
[comment|https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MJAVADOC-310?focusedCommentId=354200&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-354200]:
{quote}
In one of the Maven Hangouts we spent some time on this issue. Jason is very
clear about this: plugins should have no knowledge about each other. If there
are shared configuration-elements amongst plugins, then the pom.xml might need
to be enriched for such elements.
{quote}
The proposed fix actually violates that statement. Since plugins run in
isolated classloaders, shouldn't the config be isolated too?
{quote}
bq. How can I make use of that in MPIR and MPMD?
at the moment, copy/paste
{quote}
This is something I would like to avoid if there is no other solution. Copy and
paste ends in hell. No one will ever update the copied block.
> improve jdk requirement when m-compiler-p not explicitely configured: use
> default properties
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MPLUGIN-279
> URL: https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPLUGIN-279
> Project: Maven Plugin Tools
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Plugin Plugin
> Affects Versions: 3.3
> Reporter: Herve Boutemy
> Assignee: Herve Boutemy
> Fix For: 3.4
>
>
> When m-compiler-p has no explicit configuration, plugin-info report displays
> "Default target for maven-compiler-plugin version xxx"
> This message is misleading, since default target can be set with
> {{$\{maven.compiler.target}}} property
> The detection algorithm should look for this property
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.6#6162)
