Hello all
The current Maven Compiler plugin (not the JPMS work) cannot be built
because of compilation errors. A fixed version is available with the
JPMS work (integration tests pass). However, it would require the
following dependencies to be released first:
* maven-plugin-tools 4.0.0-beta
Hello all
I'm starting to work on a prototype using the new build element
(a proposal for a unified replacement for ,
, , etc.) proposed in a previous discussion on
this mailing list. For starting, I'm searching for usages of
in Maven source code and I try to add codes doing
something equi
Le 2024-09-21 à 17 h 45, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
PR seems ok
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1735
@Martin Desruisseaux pls confirm is this what you had in mind?
Yes, this is my guess of what was intended. Thanks!
Martin
---
Howdy,
AFAIK, as I see, the point is that it nullifies if "default" value is
present, and those come from corresponding super POM?
https://github.com/apache/maven/tree/45f9b81b4a8451a75864ef1c861c5bb201a54790/maven-api-impl/src/main/resources/org/apache/maven/model
Basically, keep only the non-de
AFAIK, the Model.pomFile is null when the model is not a « build” Pom, I.e.
is loaded from the local repository rather than a project being built.
Not sure if that applies here, I’m on phone…
Le sam. 21 sept. 2024 à 16:43, Tamás Cservenák a
écrit :
> Howdy,
>
> AFAIK, as I see, the point is that
Lets see what this PR does
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1735
I agree with Martin, it really looks "sus"...
T
On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 4:49 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
> AFAIK, the Model.pomFile is null when the model is not a « build” Pom, I.e.
> is loaded from the local repository rathe
Le 2024-09-21 à 16 h 43, Tamás Cservenák a écrit :
AFAIK, as I see, the point is that it nullifies if "default" value is
present, and those come from corresponding super POM? Basically, keep
only the non-default values?
But just above that method, there is another method which performs the
PR seems ok
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1735
@Martin Desruisseaux pls confirm is this what you had in mind?
@Guillaume Nodet pls confirm the intent (and the assumption was it a
bug, or we overlooked something?)
T
On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 4:57 PM Tamás Cservenák wrote:
>
> Lets see what
