Anyone else? (I need one more PMC for this and the maven-test-tools)
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 11:22 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: [vote] release maven-plugin-testing-tools 1.0-alpha-3
In preparation for some
Not specifying a phase is the same IIRC as not specifying
@requiresDep
When you do this, the results are indeterminate (you get whatever has
already been resolved by previous plugins)
-Original Message-
From: Shane Isbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 4:37
Thanks Brian, specifying compile after @requiresDependencyResolution works.
>From what I can tell, the behavior is:
@requiresDependencyResolution with unspecified phase
* MavenProject.getArtifacts returns set of artifacts: {compile}
* MavenProject.getDependencyArtifacts returns set of direct
depen
Hi Shane, what scope did you specify after
@requiresDependencyResolution? (you need to put a scope there or it
won't work...)
-Original Message-
From: Shane Isbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 3:41 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Project.getArtifacts Doe
I'm using maven 2.0.7 client. I have a Mojo implementation with the @phase
compiler and @requiresDependencyResolution parameters set. The
project.getArtifacts method does not return artifacts with the scope
'provided'. The method project.getDependencyArtifacts does return dependent
artifacts with t
FWIW, This is precisely the functionality that the
"generateReleasePoms" flag of the release plugin was intended to
provide.
(Happy New Year from Aus. everyone :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 31/12/2007, at 11:21 PM, Simon Kitching wrote:
Hi All,
John Casey wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'd like to make
Hi All,
John Casey wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page with the plugin
> auto-version resolution stuff that we've been discussing lately (on the
> assembly-plugin vote thread, for one thing). I think it's clear that we
> cannot continue to allow Maven t
