-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any
plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will)
modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light of this, inherited
plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build
behavior.
We have a <pluginManagement/> section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical multiproject-style
setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
- -------------------
...
<pluginManagement>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.4</version>
<configuration>
<someParam>someValue</someParam>
</configuration>
</plugin>
</plugins>
</pluginManagement>
...
- -------------------
child-pom.xml
- -------------------
...
<parent>
<groupId>test</groupId> <!-- Pretend that all of
<artifactId>test-root</artifactId> | this resolves to the
<version>1.0</version> | parent-pom.xml above -->
</parent>
...
<build>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId> <!-- groupId,
<artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId> | artifactId
</plugin> | enough here.
-->
</build>
...
- -------------------
If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement section,
just specify it locally; more local specification in an inheritance
hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.
> Now I see why the complete <build> section is inherited when it is
> absent in the child:
>
> *if* ( childBuild == *null* )
> {
> child.setBuild( parentBuild );
> }
> *else*
> {
> /// A lot of fields are inherited, except <plugins>
> / }
>
> I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since Maven does
> not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
> inheritance rules.
> Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete <plugins> section if it
> is not specified in the child, just like you do with <resources> and
> <testResources>?
> That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no
> <build> section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the build
> settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
> - Peter
>
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by
>>> derived POM's.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The law on inheritance resides here:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
>> project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217&sortdir=down&view=log
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In my parent POM I have a <build> section which specifies the source
>>> directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
>>>
>>> <build>
>>> <sourceDirectory>src</sourceDirectory>
>>> <plugins>
>>> <plugin>
>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
>>> <version>1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT</version>
>>> <configuration>
>>> <source>1.5</source>
>>> <target>1.5</target>
>>> </configuration>
>>> </plugin>
>>> </plugins>
>>> </build>
>>>
>>> In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new
>>> <build> section is specified:
>>>
>>> <build>
>>> <sourceDirectory>module/src</sourceDirectory>
>>> </build>
>>>
>>> The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM,
>>> but it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it
>>> starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I
>>> do not specify a <build> section in the derived POM, the settings of
>>> the base POM are inherited.
>>>
>>> It appears that the <build> section is (completely) inherited if it
>>> is not present in the derived POM, but if a <build> section is
>>> specified in the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown
>>> away and only the settings of the derived POM are used.
>>> Is this correct?
>>>
>>
>>
>> We selectively choose what to inherit and the configuration for the
>> plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form configurations
>> essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the configurations
>> but this might not work generally so if we need to allow the plugin to
>> determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll probably
>> have to come up with some way to decide this using notations we have for
>> plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue so we'll take a look at
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCbr0UK3h2CZwO/4URAqFHAJ0ay0AvjZ6oniTE+FY2m+jNMqG76QCfVpxi
LNQUjh/RIpyil4bX6nB7RhE=
=rNwb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
