I agree with the subsequent discussion that I'm not sure why you need
a lifecycle for it, but that doesn't seem relevant to your question:
On 10/09/2009, at 2:36 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
The question comes, where do we put the configuration about what
signature
to check.
Solution 3, in
I wouldn't implement any of this like you are but that's me and you're
free to do what you like.
You should be able to put the lifecycle in an extension and then you
can use it as you like. I would be opposed to adding this packaging to
the core of Maven as we have done with things like WAR
2009/9/9 Jason van Zyl
>
> On 2009-09-09, at 6:56 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> 2009/9/9 Jason van Zyl
>>
>> Packaging was originally meant to model a archive of some sort. The POM
>>> packaging is stretching it because lifecycles are mapped to packaging and
>>> we
>>> needed something diffe
On 2009-09-09, at 6:56 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
2009/9/9 Jason van Zyl
Packaging was originally meant to model a archive of some sort. The
POM
packaging is stretching it because lifecycles are mapped to
packaging and we
needed something different. I think this here too might also be
2009/9/9 Jason van Zyl
> Packaging was originally meant to model a archive of some sort. The POM
> packaging is stretching it because lifecycles are mapped to packaging and we
> needed something different. I think this here too might also be stretching
> it. I don't think an archive with API sign
Packaging was originally meant to model a archive of some sort. The
POM packaging is stretching it because lifecycles are mapped to
packaging and we needed something different. I think this here too
might also be stretching it. I don't think an archive with API
signatures is a packaging. It
OK, this is related to animal-sniffer.
I have a new packaging type signature
This is designed to capture the signatures of an API, e.g. Java SE 1.4, Java
SE 1.5, etc.
But of course, it can do so much more, the way I have it set up you can do
something like so:
org.apache.maven
maven-plugin
vsive...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: vsiveton
> Date: Wed Sep 9 13:52:40 2009
> New Revision: 812962
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=812962&view=rev
> Log:
> o switch to 2.1 maven prerequisite
Why?
>
> Modified:
> maven/plugins/trunk/maven-project-info-reports-plugin/pom.xml
>
Stephen,
If you're already an Apache committer just let me know what your id
is, if fill out a CLA[1] and follow the instructions to send it in.
When the CLA is processed we'll get your account setup.
[1]: http://www.apache.org/licenses/
On 2009-09-09, at 12:45 PM, Vincent Siveton wrote:
+1
Vincent
2009/9/6 Arnaud HERITIER :
> Hi all,
> I'd like to propose giving commit access to Stephen Connolly.
> He is already a committer @ Mojo for many monthes and did a great work on
> several plugins.
> He is the author of the very useful versions plugin. He is working on
> several other
+1
Emmanuel
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Arnaud HERITIER <
arnaud.herit...@exoplatform.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'd like to propose giving commit access to Stephen Connolly.
> He is already a committer @ Mojo for many monthes and did a great work on
> several plugins.
> He is the author of
11 matches
Mail list logo
