I agree that we should document changes between Maven 3 and 4 thoroughly, a
migration table is a good idea. I've added a comment in the maven-site
ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNGSITE-444
Feel free to add your scenarios there.
I'm convinced your scenarios can be done using Maven 4
Le mar. 23 mars 2021 à 08:34, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Alright, let's take a look back at your problem situation. I tried to
> explain others, but figured out I didn't completely understand it.
> Is this what you meant?
>
> root:
> ... foo:
> foo-a
> foo-b
> ... images:
>
Alright, let's take a look back at your problem situation. I tried to
explain others, but figured out I didn't completely understand it.
Is this what you meant?
root:
... foo:
foo-a
foo-b
... images:
image-a
image-b
subparent:
. subimage-a
.
Le lun. 22 mars 2021 à 20:49, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Alright, there indeed are specific problems that cannot be solved with
> -pl. Then again the automatic recursiveness does give benefit that we
> didn't have in 3.6.3.
> Your problem can be solved using profiles, multiple invocations, exact
Alright, there indeed are specific problems that cannot be solved with -pl.
Then again the automatic recursiveness does give benefit that we didn't
have in 3.6.3.
Your problem can be solved using profiles, multiple invocations, exact -pl
module specifications or different directory formats.
I guess
Le lun. 22 mars 2021 à 16:07, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Err, let's keep using examples to avoid miscommunication :p If I
> understand you correctly, you mean this:
>
> root:
> ... images:
> image-a
> image-b
> ... assemblies:
> assembly-a
> assembly-b
>
> When
Err, let's keep using examples to avoid miscommunication :p If I understand
you correctly, you mean this:
root:
... images:
image-a
image-b
... assemblies:
assembly-a
assembly-b
When running from root, you can use:
> mvn -pl !root,!images,!assemblies -N
This
Le lun. 22 mars 2021 à 15:03, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Hey Romain,
>
> Your example will work with -N when MNG-7112 [1] is implemented (which we
> are working on as we speak).
> MNG-7112 says: -N together with a project exclusion (via -pl) will make the
> project exclusion non-recursive. So it
Hey Romain,
Your example will work with -N when MNG-7112 [1] is implemented (which we
are working on as we speak).
MNG-7112 says: -N together with a project exclusion (via -pl) will make the
project exclusion non-recursive. So it will not exclude the children.
Following your example,
> cd images-
Hi,
Just saw the PR was merged but it is actually still a regression, what's
the plan to keep this kind of build working:
Structure:
. root
|- core
|- ...
`- images-parent // can be assemblies too or anything else
|- image1
|- ...
`- imageN
> cd images-parent && mvn m
Le dim. 28 févr. 2021 à 10:15, Robert Scholte a
écrit :
> We should be talking about consistency.
> We have a flag --non-recursive, which implies that recursive is the
> default.
> With Maven 3 that is just not always the case and this should be fixed.
> Maven 4 is the right version to do so.
>
>
We should be talking about consistency.
We have a flag --non-recursive, which implies that recursive is the default.
With Maven 3 that is just not always the case and this should be fixed. Maven 4
is the right version to do so.
Using -pl -N does not work with Maven 3: it'll say "Couldn't find th
Le ven. 26 févr. 2021 à 14:30, Robert Scholte a
écrit :
> This discussion is about aggregators, and not about parent.
> Quite often an aggregator is also the parent of its modules, but that is
> not required.
>
Ack
>
> Calling -pl with Maven3 behaves unnatural: if you want to
> call a specifi
This discussion is about aggregators, and not about parent.
Quite often an aggregator is also the parent of its modules, but that is not
required.
Calling -pl with Maven3 behaves unnatural: if you want to call a
specific aggregator, you want its modules to be built.
Hence I still support the c
I still think it is wrong to have such a global toggle + break backward
compatibility (-pl + -N is *already* used for what it is today which is not
the proposal but -pl parent without -N is also already used and works well).
You can also take into consideration that -pl -module -N meaning is
comple
I've had a talk this morning with Robert Scholte and Maarten Mulders about
this, since I had the feeling we were not getting further in this mail
thread.
First of all, we all agreed that we definitely needed functionality for
both recursive and non-recursive project selection. What Robert prefers
Put some comments inline but agree another minilanguage solution works.
Maybe -pl !!parent?
Le dim. 21 févr. 2021 à 22:08, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Romain: 2 has overlap if I'm not mistaken, what if the user invokes: mvn
> -pl project-a -plr !project-a. Perhaps the user should be able to only
Romain: 2 has overlap if I'm not mistaken, what if the user invokes: mvn
-pl project-a -plr !project-a. Perhaps the user should be able to only
select aggregator poms via -plr..
And I'm not sure how the alias function would work. I assume something
like:
- pom.xml config (psuedo code): -pl parent,
My 2 cents: Please don't drop the recursive behavior again because it is
really useful!
Crazy idea (just brainstorming here):
-pl foo builds only foo
-pl foo+ builds foo and its children, wherever they are exactly
This would also co-exist with the ! and ? prefixes.
PS: Since if often use shell
Le dim. 21 févr. 2021 à 20:39, Martin Kanters a
écrit :
> Hm, so I guess that's indeed a valid reason to keep the old functionality
> working. Thanks for the enlightenment, Romain.
> Still I think it makes more sense to make project selection recursive by
> default, but it's not straightforward t
Hm, so I guess that's indeed a valid reason to keep the old functionality
working. Thanks for the enlightenment, Romain.
Still I think it makes more sense to make project selection recursive by
default, but it's not straightforward to come up with a nice combination of
flags.
Let's summarize:
1. -
I like the regex idea but wildcard (*) does not work well due to common
shell expansion (or it already works but it is outside of maven scope to be
concrete).
My 2cts would be that, to be honest, I think we all lead to have aliases in
maven for potentially very long commands (there was some thread
Thanks for the quick reaction/answers!
TBH, I haven't fully understood why -N cannot be used here. I do understand
that -N reduces the reactor to one project (before project selection via -pl
can kick in).
But what if -N wouldn't be applied if -pl is present? It would then become a
"secondary"
;
> >> Martin
> >>
> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6981
> >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7102
> >>
> >> Op za 20 feb. 2021 om 10:04 schreef Markus KARG >:
> >>
> >> > Yes it might be the better solutio
/issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7102
>>
>> Op za 20 feb. 2021 om 10:04 schreef Markus KARG :
>>
>> > Yes it might be the better solution to keep it backwards compatible and
>> do
>> > recursive -plr X / -plr !X as a new option.
>> >
>> >
ucau> | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le sam. 20 févr. 2021 à 09:14, Markus KARG a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > I second that. It is counterintuitive. It
as a new option.
>>
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Februar 2021 09:20
>> An: Maven Developers List
>> Betreff: Re: Maven 4: -pl !... is not recursive
>>
>> Agree i
[mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Februar 2021 09:20
> An: Maven Developers List
> Betreff: Re: Maven 4: -pl !... is not recursive
>
> Agree it should be alignde, just wonder how you handle '-N' equivalent if
> -pl is recursive (so until there is a solutio
submodules.
> -Markus
>
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Falko Modler [mailto:f.mod...@gmx.net]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Februar 2021 01:39
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> Betreff: Maven 4: -pl !... is not recursive
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I started playing
>
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Falko Modler [mailto:f.mod...@gmx.net]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Februar 2021 01:39
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> Betreff: Maven 4: -pl !... is not recursive
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I started playing around with 4.0.0-alpha-1-20210
I second that. It is counterintuitive. It would be beneficial if -pl !X would
also exclude ist submodules.
-Markus
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Falko Modler [mailto:f.mod...@gmx.net]
Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Februar 2021 01:39
An: dev@maven.apache.org
Betreff: Maven 4: -pl !... is not
Hi everyone,
I started playing around with 4.0.0-alpha-1-20210214.163053-40 and I
realized that -pl X will now also build submodules of X but -pl !X will
only exclude X, not its submodules.
Isn't this a bit inconsistent?
Cheers,
Falko
-
32 matches
Mail list logo
