On 24/04/2007, at 2:18 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 23 Apr 07, at 8:06 PM 23 Apr 07, Brett Porter wrote:
This sounds reasonable to me, but I think there's lots of things
that work on the assumption of one pom per g/a/v. So the attached
artifact should also get a new artifact ID
A new id
On 23 Apr 07, at 8:06 PM 23 Apr 07, Brett Porter wrote:
This sounds reasonable to me, but I think there's lots of things
that work on the assumption of one pom per g/a/v. So the attached
artifact should also get a new artifact ID
A new id if you are going to deploy separate artifacts, or t
This sounds reasonable to me, but I think there's lots of things that
work on the assumption of one pom per g/a/v. So the attached artifact
should also get a new artifact ID - which also seems reasonable to
me. It's just a whole new artifact coming out of a single build, the
POM for which i
Jason,
Out of curiosity, how does the "create a new pom" thing work?
I'm mostly just curious in regards to the gpg signing. I want to make
sure the pom that is deployed matches what is signed.
Dan
On Sunday 22 April 2007 20:36, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the shade plugin I've add
Hi,
In the shade plugin I've added the capability to create a POM that
reflects what has been shaded. To correct the problem with the two
plexus JARs, I shaded one into the other so I have the single plexus-
default-container artifact again. So the idea being during
development modules are
