On 24/02/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:40 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 24/02/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:07 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On 24/02/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I'd like to do a release of the commons-parent pom - primarily to > >> >> upgrade to the latest commons-build-plugin 1.2 release. > >> >> > >> >> I have also upgraded the plugin versions and changed the "rc" & > >> >> "release" profiles to now only produce the javadocs and not the whole > >> >> site (this resolves a problem for multi-module components). > >> >> > >> >> Are there any other changes or feedback before calling a vote on > this? > >> > > >> > I think the default maven.compile.source|target entries should be > >> > removed from the POM. > >> > > >> > Seems to me that projects should have to define these, and not rely on > >> > the default. > >> > >> > >> I disagree with this because the whole point of the commons-parent > >> pom.xml is to reduce the amount of dulicate configuration in component > >> projects and I see no benefit in forcing components to define > >> unnecessary properties when the default suits them. > > > > But the compilation source and target are specific to each project, > > just like inceptionYear. > > > As I said it reduces duplication of configuration - no difference from > inherintance in java. >
It does not reduce duplication in the long run, as each project that upgrades from the minimum of 1.3 will need to define the properties. It can only reduce duplication for the very few projects that will never change their minimum version from 1.3. > > Unlike other properties, such as plugin versions, the source and > > target versions can never be updated in the parent pom. If it is > > updated, that all projects that are currently relying on the default > > will have to be updated to override the parent pom. At which point the > > parent pom properties become useless anyway. > > > The parent-pom is versioned and released - we can update those values > at any time. Obviously if we did change the values we would have to > make each component had the correct value configured either through > the parent or overriden in its pom before it was moved to the new > version parent. Exactly. So every project that does not currently want to use 1.3 must override the properties. If the parent pom properties were ever to change from 1.3, then those projects that currently rely on the default must define the properties, at which point the parent pom properties are not being used by any projects. > > > It's also tedious trying to find the JVM requirements if one has to > > look in both the project pom and the parent pom. > > > Tedious is something people do repetitively - I'm sure once people see > whats in the parent they don't have to continually go back and keep > checking. > But if the value in the parent POM can change, and multiple parent poms are in use, then rechecking *is* needed. > >> I also think this is a non-issue. We have a good history over the past > >> few years of making sure components are compatible with the JDK > >> version they target and I don't believe theres a single example of a > >> release that had these properties incorrectly set. > >> Also we did have this discussion before: > >> > >> http://markmail.org/message/sc2d7efxscz6n3sz > >> > > > > I know, and I still disagree. > > > Me too :) > > > Niall > > > >> Niall > >> > >> > >> >> Niall > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
