> -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 9:08 AM > To: Maven Users List > Subject: Re: Controlling order of plugin execution > > That's usually a sign that you have wandered off The Maven Way™ > > There are ways back onto the blessed path... they typically involve > writing > a plugin > > > On 4 June 2014 16:47, jhgnwea <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Paul Benedict wrote > > > I agree with Dan. Last I check, IIRC, the order of operations of > plugins > > > is > > > defined by their sequential order in the POM. However, I also find > this a > > > bit problematic with inheritance -- I don't know off the top of my > head > > > what happens then. > > > > Ordering applies only for executions of a single plugin. If you > need to > > interleave executions of two or more plugins you're out of luck. > Say you > > have two plugins, exec-maven and maven-sql, and want to run > > > > exec-maven A1 > > maven-sql B1 > > exec-maven A2 > > maven-sql B2 > > > > A1 and A2 will run in that order, and (B1, B2) will be ordered, but > you > > can't control which set (A or B) runs first without horribly abusing > the > > phase bindings. And, if you have a more complex sequence with 3 > plugins > > and multiple executions of each, there aren't enough available > phases to > > successfully order everything. > > > > It should be possible to bind multiple plugin executions, of > DIFFERENT > > plugins, to a single phase and deterministically specify the > execution > > order.
Sorry, I disagree. One alternative is to use antrun, but that seems like going backwards. I'm really curious why there's a strong philosophical objection to requesting this enhancement. Is it unreasonable to suggest that "The Maven Way" is not perfect and might need some adjustments to handle common use-cases the original designers didn't foresee? Is my goal of using Maven to automate CI/CD, which can involve configuring external resources by running various plugins in a specific sequence, somehow in violation of "the Maven way"? Consider the phrase "...you have wandered off The Maven Way™". I can't tell if you intended this ironically or seriously. If it's the latter, it seems like you're saying is "Maven is perfect. If Maven doesn't handle your use-case, then your use-case is invalid". Is that true?
