Brett Porter wrote:
Great - thanks Stephen. IIRC I fixed the manifest problems for the next
release of the JAR plugin (or at least assigned the issue to myself to do by
then :)
That's terrific news.
Let me know if you want any additional help/feedback on this one.
Cheers, Stephen.
--
|---
6 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Q] Setting a property so that it's visible from
> another plug in
>
>
> Brett Porter wrote:
>
> > I was speaking to some Atlassian folk last night and they
> are also on
> > beta-10, as is Avalon.
Brett Porter wrote:
I was speaking to some Atlassian folk last night and they are also on
beta-10, as is Avalon. I wonder how many others have decided to stick with
it?
Just for reference - Avalon builds have been updated to work with RC2.
Some tweaking was needed on the site generation and some
> Just to summarize: I'm +1 to add a new setter tag and make it
> available for plugins. I may even be able to add it sometime
> tomorrow if others Maven committers also agree.
>
> I think we have 2 solutions:
>
> 1/ We deprecate pluginVar, and create a new tag called
> something like: getPlug
Yes, I think we should do point releases if necessary.
The PMC have also been discussing future versioning strategy so that what a
beta and an RC are clearer for future releases.
Cheers,
Brett
> -Original Message-
> From: Heritier Arnaud [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 22 Ap
> It might still be a good idea to have a core maven plugin
> containing for example the jelly tags so that previous users
> can also upgrade to newer versions of the plugins.
I actually like Dion's idea better - a tag library JAR that plugins can
include in the same way as, say, jelly-tags-xml.
> production and you just simply can't break them completely,
> even though it's a beta or rc... :-)
You don't have to upgrade either.
> At least, we should make an attempt not to break them. For
Have I broken anything since rc1 that hasn't been fixed? My goal was 100%
compatibility and I've a
> > We should create a set tag as well I guess.
>
> Yep. That would be great. Only problem with this (as with
> pluginVar - which is not too well named BTW if we add a set
> tag) is that plugins who uses it will not be compatible with
> previous Maven versions...
I don't think we can support o
We should create a set tag as well I guess.
If you just want to load the plugin, I think you need to do the depedency
handle. We ended up deciding this was the best way rather than using
dependencies on dummy goals (like war:load).
I know you know how this works because cactus has a dependency ha
While plugin.getPluginContext works, it relies on the plugin being
initialised. You can do that by declaring a dummy tag in the plugin (the
dependency handle, and most importantly, adding the uri to your names space
in the calling plugin).
An easier way is to use maven:pluginVar as it will initial
10 matches
Mail list logo
