Yes, this definitely helps, Stephen. Thanks for your detailed and
well-written explanation. I appreciate it much.
Cheers,
Paul
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, December 17, 2014, Paul Benedict
> wrote:
>
> > Stephen, I
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014, Paul Benedict wrote:
> Stephen, I don't feel strongly about it but I don't think there is another
> option. Unlike assembly:single which is used to create multiple
> distributions, this is about creating an artifact destined to be consumed
> as a dependency. Corre
Stephen, I don't feel strongly about it but I don't think there is another
option. Unlike assembly:single which is used to create multiple
distributions, this is about creating an artifact destined to be consumed
as a dependency. Correct me if wrong, but Maven artifact types are meant to
produce on
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014, Paul Benedict wrote:
> With regards to the mythical "assembly" type, just like other artifact
> types, there is just only one primary artifact. Unlike running
> assembly:single, which can output multiple files (.zip, .gz, etc.), the
> output here will be just one
With regards to the mythical "assembly" type, just like other artifact
types, there is just only one primary artifact. Unlike running
assembly:single, which can output multiple files (.zip, .gz, etc.), the
output here will be just one artifact. Does anyone disagree with that
perspective? If multipl
I like this approach as well. Having to have an attached artifact to have a zip
or tar.gz with a meaningless pom or jar always seemed a bit weird.
manfred
Stephen Connolly wrote on 11.12.2014 07:14:
> either mojo or a pull request against the assembly plugin (as you may need
> to tweak the asse
either mojo or a pull request against the assembly plugin (as you may need
to tweak the assembly:single default parameters)
On 11 December 2014 at 14:54, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I am in agreement with Stephen. If I decide to try to prototype this out,
> where is a good place to lay down some code
I am in agreement with Stephen. If I decide to try to prototype this out,
where is a good place to lay down some code?
Cheers,
Paul
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think having an assembly type with a default binding of assembly:s
I think having an assembly type with a default binding of assembly:single
to the packaging phase and a default descriptor being the zip or zip and
tar.gz descriptors would achieve what is required while simplifying
escalating to more complex descriptors
On Thursday, December 11, 2014, Timothy Astl
I have a situation/problem/use-case where I would like to take a
collection of XML schemas and create a bundle of themso that they could
be included into other projects. The destination projects vary. Some
are written in Java, some in C++, etc. So I'd like to produce amore
platform agnostic b
Hmm, not sure I agree - I think its just fact that users would love to have
simpler way to create ZIPs/TARs
and the most logical/simple way (from a users point of view) to do this is a
packaging typ for these.
Domi
On 11.12.2014, at 09:27, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> Well the real question is
Well the real question is what would you do with dependencies?
So, for example, if you have a zip dependency, do you unpack it and overlay
or do you copy it in? Or do you do nothing and leave it to the dependency
plugin?
What about zip vs tar.gz dependency? If building a zip I might expect
explod
Yes, but I don't think making a specific plugin just for adding zip
packaging is optimal. Hence the idea of having it in the assembly plugin.
Thinking of it though, one very likely wants to create both a zip and a tar
file. So maybe the packaging type should be something else, and then it
creates b
Anders, like make a maven-zip-plugin project?
On Dec 11, 2014 1:50 AM, "Anders Hammar" wrote:
> I don't think that the zip package type should be part of Maven core, but
> we could provide some plugin which provides for it as a custom packaging
> type. Possibly this could be part of the assembly
I don't think that the zip package type should be part of Maven core, but
we could provide some plugin which provides for it as a custom packaging
type. Possibly this could be part of the assembly plugin.
/Anders
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> Well my experience in buil
Well my experience in building a zip *as a dependency* feels like it's
hackish. For example, I create a "pom" packaging type and then configure
the assembly plugin for the "package" phase. Okay, but I say this is
hackish because it's not straight forward, and the zip is a second artifact
(the pom i
Probably because people just use the assembly plugin ?
Kristian
2014-12-11 6:38 GMT+01:00 Paul Benedict :
> Recently I needed to create zip artifacts for overlays into WAR. Maven
> doesn't have support for "zip" packaging type projects, but MNG-1683 wants
> to introduce it.
>
> I am curious why
-1683: Zip packaging
Recently I needed to create zip artifacts for overlays into WAR. Maven doesn't
have support for "zip" packaging type projects, but MNG-1683 wants to introduce
it.
I am curious why this issue has been ignored. Is it just a lack of time or
interest? Or is there
Recently I needed to create zip artifacts for overlays into WAR. Maven
doesn't have support for "zip" packaging type projects, but MNG-1683 wants
to introduce it.
I am curious why this issue has been ignored. Is it just a lack of time or
interest? Or is there a philosophical issue behind the delay
19 matches
Mail list logo
