I've been thinking about this more, and I really think it's a bad
idea to scrap extensions completely. The more work I do on
conversions, etc. the more I see that there is a need to tweak Maven
here and there for certain projects. A great case-in-point here is
profile activators...without e
I might have another usecase in toolchains
(http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Toolchains)
A toolchain definition that is not part of the default set needs to be
added as extension to the build. It's accessed by multiple plugins and
therefore it's rather impractical to add it as dependency to e
On Sep 20, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Jason,
How would you implement the XWiki use case, namely the ability to
add XAR file format support? Right now it's using an extension to:
1) define a lifecycle
2) define an Archiver format implementation
ooops... sorry I spoke too fa
Hi Jason,
How would you implement the XWiki use case, namely the ability to add
XAR file format support? Right now it's using an extension to:
1) define a lifecycle
2) define an Archiver format implementation
Thanks
-Vincent
On Sep 4, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
After trying to
On 4 Sep 07, at 11:55 AM 4 Sep 07, Dan Tran wrote:
What are the impacts of plugins with use as a way to
override
the default build lifecycle? ie ( pde-maven-plugin, native-maven-
plugin )
There's another use case and that should also be made more clear, but
ideally plugin metadata shou
What are the impacts of plugins with use as a way to override
the default build lifecycle? ie ( pde-maven-plugin, native-maven-plugin )
-D
On 9/4/07, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1
>
> -Original Message-
>
> For 2.1 I would like to use providers stated as dependencies wh
+1
-Original Message-
For 2.1 I would like to use providers stated as dependencies which
they are (easy to do in corporate builds), and the rest are core
components. John has been working on some active collections, and I
think they can be finished so that we could clarify how the s
On Sep 4, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
Once active collections are in place then there should be no more
need for them since as I understand it you basically have nothing
in the core then and just pull them in where they are needed for
wagons and scm providers. So we could look at
On Sep 4, 2007, at 5:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
The biggest offender are providers posing as extensions: wagon-
webdav is not an extension, it is a dependency required by the
deploy plugin. In the exact same way you would specify an SCM
provider as dependency of the release plugin if you n
On 04/09/2007, at 7:34 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
After trying to chase down a problem with extensions it became very
clear to me that we have mixed concerns with extensions and it just
makes the core crappy.
The biggest offender are providers posing as extensions: wagon-
webdav is not an e
After trying to chase down a problem with extensions it became very
clear to me that we have mixed concerns with extensions and it just
makes the core crappy.
The biggest offender are providers posing as extensions: wagon-webdav
is not an extension, it is a dependency required by the deploy
11 matches
Mail list logo
