would it be possible to remove the default relative path... if people want it
they can add it... ../pom.xml just seems very arbitrary
maybe if you want group based parents it makes sense , i have found real power
in using functional parents that define all the plugins for a particular type
of
On 11-Jun-08, at 6:47 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
MNG-624 (automatic parent versioning) is far and away the most
popular MNG issue with 85 votes (the next highest has 57).
In June of last year, Jason evaluated the attached patch and found
problems with it, but the problems weren't specified
On 12/06/2008, at 12:45 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
I haven't reviewed the patch, but the comments by Eric about what
he did sound quite reasonable to me.
Me, too.
- ensure that when deployed to the repository, it is *always* set.
A POM in the repository with a versionle
Brett Porter wrote:
I haven't reviewed the patch, but the comments by Eric about what he did
sound quite reasonable to me.
Me, too.
- ensure that when deployed to the repository, it is *always* set. A POM in
the repository with a versionless-parent would be considered invalid (this is
the m
I haven't reviewed the patch, but the comments by Eric about what he
did sound quite reasonable to me.
Off the top of my head, the rules for this behaviour would be:
- use the POM found in relativePath (default, ../pom.xml) first
- if checked out independantly, use RELEASE
- ensure that when de
MNG-624 (automatic parent versioning) is far and away the most popular MNG
issue with 85 votes (the next highest has 57).
In June of last year, Jason evaluated the attached patch and found
problems with it, but the problems weren't specified in the bug
description.
Can we revive discussion
Hi everyone,
As I'm sure you've noticed from the discussion on this list and my
commit logs, I've been working to solve a problem between concrete
interpolation of the POM at project-construction time and the need to
update plugin configurations to reflect changing state in the project
instan
Timothy Reilly wrote:
Igor Fedorenko wrote
Are you using IBM Java5 VM by any chance? I had to switch to
SUN VM to workaround this issue.
Yes. That was it. I fixed that so I can still use IBM JDK 1.5.
To do that I've rebuilt modello locally.
This is probably a list for whoever is maintain
On 11/06/2008, at 1:05 AM, John Casey wrote:
Since the project can change in legitimate ways during the course of
a build - especially for forked executions, such as changing the
build directories - that means that expressions used to configure
subsequent plugin executions MUST be synchroni
