> > What about specifying <sourceDirectory> as a fileset?  This 
> would add 
> > a lot more work to retrofit plugins but it really would give 
> > developers good flexibility.
> > 
> > <sourceDirectory>
> >   <include name="dir1" />
> >   <include name="dir2" />  
> >   <include name="dir3" />
> > </sourceDirectory>
> 
> Absolutely never going to happen. With that you've just made 
> everything to do with sources an order of magnitude more 
> difficult which means maven internals and all the plugins.

Well...I'm not surprised to hear that.

I think <generatedSourceDirectory> sounds OK but would like to hear from
more people who use extensively use code generation in their projects.  I'm
sure Maven will hear stories about how that strategy is not compatible for
various reasons.  
  
Would the java plugin compile <sourceDirectory> first then
<generatesSourceDirectory> second?  Well it would presumably occur at the
same time.  Other plugins that require access to a source directory would
need to be tweaked to accept two directories.  For some like java:compile
and I think javadoc I think that's OK.

What each individual plugin could do though is make their own private Ant
fileset from <sourceDirectory> and <generatedSourceDirectory> if they are
unable to process multiple source directories.  This would never be visible
to the core Maven model or to other plugins for that matter.

> -- 
> jvz.
> 
> Jason van Zyl
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://tambora.zenplex.org
> 
> In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a 
> rational and technical order to justify his work and to be 
> justified in it.
>   
>   -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to