The behavior is AND. You can have multiple profiles for OR.
Chas
> On Aug 15, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Christopher wrote:
>
> If there could be "AND" and "OR" primitives for profile activation
> conditions, you could do something like:
>
>
>
> !profilea
>
>
If there could be "AND" and "OR" primitives for profile activation
conditions, you could do something like:
!profilea
profilea
!true
Sadly, this feature does not exist.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016, 11:45 Karl Heinz
3.9 for this
situation (and latest 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT):
1. mvn initialize: profile activated
2. mvn initialize -Dprofilea: profile not activated
3. mvn initialize -Dprofilea=false: profile activated
4. mvn initialize -Dprofilea=true: profile not activated
Guillaume
Message du 12/08/16 18:34
De
vn initialize -Dprofilea=false: profile activated
4. mvn initialize -Dprofilea=true: profile not activated
Guillaume
Message du 12/08/16 18:34
De : "Robert Scholte"
A : "Maven Developers List"
Copie à :
Objet : Re: Profile Activation
Hi Karl Heinz,
you should rea
On 12/08/16 18:34, Robert Scholte wrote:
Maybe the documentation isn't clear enough.
I have added the documentation about the property activation with "!"
things a few days ago...
Either my assumption was wrong or the the intention is wrong...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz
--
Guillaume
Message du 12/08/16 18:34
De : "Robert Scholte"
A : "Maven Developers List"
Copie à :
Objet : Re: Profile Activation
Hi Karl Heinz,
you should read the activation like this:
always activate, *unless* profilea is true.
So it says nothing about the availability of
lea=true: profile not activated
Guillaume
> Message du 12/08/16 18:34
> De : "Robert Scholte"
> A : "Maven Developers List"
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: Profile Activation
>
> Hi Karl Heinz,
>
> you should read the activation like this:
>
Hi Karl Heinz,
you should read the activation like this:
always activate, *unless* profilea is true.
So it says nothing about the availability of the property.
Maybe the documentation isn't clear enough.
Robert
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:45:21 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
wrote:
Hi to all,
I h
MG>quick comment
> To: dev@maven.apache.org
> From: khmarba...@gmx.de
> Subject: Profile Activation
> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:45:21 +0200
>
> Hi to all,
>
> I have the following profile:
>
>
>
>profile-not-value-true
>
>
>profilea
>!true
>
Felix Knecht wrote:
> Hi all
>
> The foofoo profile is always activated, no matter if a file 'timestamp'
> exists in the same directory like the pom.xml or
> not. It looks to me as the ${basedir} is not correctly resolved. Is this a
> known problem?
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3524
>
Is there a JIRA in for this?
nicolas de loof wrote:
Profile activation doesn't support property interopolation, even the
${basedir} one
This makes this feature unusable in nested modules configuration, as the
file are tested from current dir, not active project root...
I already reported this is
nicolas de loof schrieb:
> Profile activation doesn't support property interopolation, even the
> ${basedir} one
> This makes this feature unusable in nested modules configuration, as the
> file are tested from current dir, not active project root...
> I already reported this issue in JIRA.
>
T
Profile activation doesn't support property interopolation, even the
${basedir} one
This makes this feature unusable in nested modules configuration, as the
file are tested from current dir, not active project root...
I already reported this issue in JIRA.
Nicolas
2008/9/26 Felix Knecht <[EMAIL P
I added a proposal for some profile activation/deactivation improvements here:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/Improvements+to+Profile+Activation+Deactivation
Please take a look and add comments if you are interested.
Thanks!
Paul Gier wrote:
I would like to bring up a couple of is
ity, it is definitely profiles.
--Brian
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jesse McConnell
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 11:37 AM
To: Maven Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Profile activation/deactivation
No one can dispute the ni
f Of Jesse McConnell
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 11:37 AM
To: Maven Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Profile activation/deactivation
No one can dispute the nice things that profiles let us accomplish in
terms of toggling on functionalities...
But I wonder much this will im
John Casey wrote:
The activeByDefault flag was originally designed to allow profiles to
work as a group, with a default selection. Obviously, it's an incomplete
design, since it doesn't allow for profiles that _aren't_ part of that
grouping to be activated/deactivated independently. As for the
Ralph Goers wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile
activation and deactivation. While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some
cases where the current behaviour might be improved.
1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one
activ
D/E were meant to work in cases where the - leading character might
be a problem. If it's never a problem, we don't need them. If the
only argument to the -P option can be something like "-
myProfile" (leading dash) then we have no need for it...and the !
notation might make this even better
2.0.x and 2.1 work the same after your change. "+" means activate and "-" means
deactivate. I'm guessing it was just a typo in 2.1 that had them reversed.
What's the reason for the D: and E: syntax? Do we need these if +,-,!, can be
used?
John Casey wrote:
I looked at the logic for +/- the
No one can dispute the nice things that profiles let us accomplish in
terms of toggling on functionalities...
But I wonder much this will impact build reproducibilityespecially
given the existence of profiles in the settings.xml file. It is
already a source of minor pain where people need to
I looked at the logic for +/- the other day (when I added E: and D:,
fwiw), and the logic was backward, IIRC...I fixed it in 2.1, but it
may still be broken in 2.0.x, not sure...
-john
On May 14, 2008, at 5:44 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
3. There was a
The activeByDefault flag was originally designed to allow profiles to
work as a group, with a default selection. Obviously, it's an
incomplete design, since it doesn't allow for profiles that _aren't_
part of that grouping to be activated/deactivated independently. As
for the default profil
+1. My first reaction though was the thought, what should -P-profile
do? Is it confusing not to have it if + is supported? Would it be the
same as -P!profile?
Bernhard David wrote:
would it be possible to have "-Pprofile" work as usual (activate
profile, deactivate defaults) but "-P+profile
Paul Gier wrote:
I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile
activation and deactivation. While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some
cases where the current behaviour might be improved.
1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one
activeByDefault profile a
Same use case here.
IMHO having a distinction between "-P profile" and "-P +profile" is
acceptable. "-P profile" may work as it does today (specify the exact list
of profiles, whith auto-disabled default ones). For backward compatibility,
but also to enable exclusive profiles switching.
2008/5/1
Would a concept of profile groups help to determine which profiles are
meant to be mutually exclusive?
I use mutually exclusive profiles for different deployment
configurations, for example development and production. By default,
the development profile is actived by default, so currently
-Pprodu
"mvn install -P+optionalTests" without having to
> figure out what other profiles you need manually.
>
> Greetings,
>
> David Bernhard
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jesse McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 15 May 2008 00:04
>
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 15 May 2008 00:04
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Profile activation/deactivation
>
> I think the ! is probably better then D: E: E:
>
> jesse
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Paul Gier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
>Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be redundant if
we add "!"?
I would.
>So some examples would be:
>mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3
Yep.
>And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
>mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3
I would make it the same as
I think the ! is probably better then D: E: E:
jesse
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Paul Gier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
> >
> > Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
> >
> >
> > > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
> > >
> > So th
Brian E. Fox wrote:
Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
So the
command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
created
MNG-3571 for it. But I
Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
>3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
So the
>command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
created
>MNG-3571 for it. But I'm hesitant to add it s
Paul Gier wrote:
3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
So the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
Unless some severe drawback is reported, +1 on this because "!" is quite
natural among programmers for negation and also matches the existing syntax
34 matches
Mail list logo
