On 6 Dec 2016, at 4:17, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> You have personal experience with a feature, that doesn't even exist?
> I am impressed...
I need to read thru this thread fully and write up a longer response - but
we've been using the tiles plugin ( which myself and Richard Vowles took over )
t
Stephen,
One more slightly more abstract comment.
Your design document seems like a survey of current maven design.
I think it should be better to present several 3-4 current main pain points
and/or
much desired features at first and then show how each and every design
alteration provides for
ach
I haven't been following your proposals. I have schemed through just now.
I can say that I generally like some aspects of your proposal:
* build/artifact description split is a good thing.
* custom lifecycle declaration is great.
* building and reporting rejoin seems right
I've fails to fully
Victor, have you been following my designs?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/POM+Model+Version+5.0.0
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Project+Dependency+Trees+schema
and
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Remote+repository+layout ?
On 5 December 201
I've been experimenting with profile-based system that is close to mixins
[1].
Another existing maven extension for this is maven-tiles [2].
I think your design is close to maven-tiles, so you can try to survey it's
developers to
get feedback based on actual usage...
Personally after my experiment
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Chas Honton wrote:
> My personal experience is that mixins lead to jar hell rather fast.
You have personal experience with a feature, that doesn't even exist?
I am impressed...
Jochen
--
The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!"
http://www.keystone
Am 05.12.2016 um 16:03 schrieb Christian Schulte:
> checkout the project for you automatically. You only need the "master"
> POM and the first invocation of "mvn" will checkout the aggregator
> automatically in some way. Just thoughts, though.)
With this I am referring to what is called "build pla
Am 05.12.2016 um 15:31 schrieb Chas Honton:
> What problems are you trying to solve with mixins? What is missing from the
> current inheritance scheme?
>
> It appears to me that you are putting the "how before the "what".
>
> My personal experience is that mixins lead to jar hell rather fast.
What problems are you trying to solve with mixins? What is missing from the
current inheritance scheme?
It appears to me that you are putting the "how before the "what".
My personal experience is that mixins lead to jar hell rather fast.
Chas
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 4:28 AM, Christian Schulte
Not having read all of this for now, but that's what I was referring to
with "relaxing a constraint is easier than enforcing a new one". When in
doubt how to process conflicting elements or something like that, just
error out and fail the build with a descriptive error message. If we
later find out
On 4 December 2016 at 14:56, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> I'm currently trying to figure out how to make mixins possible in POM 5.
This is wonderful news!
> Mixins basically bring a form of multiple inheritance to the POM... which
> leads to the problems of how to solve conflicts.
Why allow both i
I'm currently trying to figure out how to make mixins possible in POM 5.
Mixins basically bring a form of multiple inheritance to the POM... which
leads to the problems of how to solve conflicts.
Inheritance Style
=
The first problem I hit was how to actually deal with a parent that
12 matches
Mail list logo
