I've been working on converting geronimo projects to use the apache 6
pom and think that the set of plugins tied down there is a very usable
choice and makes maintenance of geronimo poms a lot easier.
I certainly don't think stuff like eclipse and idea plugins belong in
any root poms. For these in particular they are both AFAICT
superseded by the built in idea tooling and m2eclipse.
thanks
david jencks
On Jun 9, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Vincent Siveton<vsive...@apache.org>
wrote:
Hi folks,
I just spot the r766947 [1] of the ASF pom which add a
pluginManagement tag for all ASF projects.
Some questions:
- some plugins like modello-maven-plugin or plexus-maven-plugin are
more specific for Maven projects than ASF projects. Why not move them
in the Maven pom? Why not external ASF plugins like tools-maven-
plugin
from geronimo project are not included?
I simply moved most of our lock down list from the maven pom up to the
apache pom. It doesn't hurt them to have the extra plugins, but if
they are truely maven specific, i'll pull them back down today when I
update everything for the source-release bundles.
- some plugins like antrun-plugin are also defined in the super pom
[2]. Why defining them twice? The maintenance will be hard: for
instance the version of the maven-clean-plugin is different between
super pom and asf pom...
The super pom is for maven users in general, we should define our own
destiny just like we tell our users to do. The rate at which we update
the super pom should be very slow, leaning towards stable releases and
never inserting alpha/beta when there is a final release available.
The same is not true of Maven, we can use whatever we want. So for me
it's not at all a concern that they are in two places. Super pom =
everyone, ASF/Maven pom = our corporate pom.
- some plugins are not included in the super pom, asf pom or maven
pom. Brett told me on IRC that ant-plugin is not a "common" plugin. I
am fine for ant-plugin but nothing is defined for eclipse/idea
plugins
which are commons IMHO. So what are common plugins for all asf
projects and common plugins for Maven projects?
We picked only the plugins that are bound by default to a lifecycle or
are frequently bound by users, such as dependency and enfocer. Things
like eclipse and idea are not frequently bound to a phase and so not
locking them down is ok. If you feel strongly they should, then go for
it...I was attempting to lock down the minimum required to produce
stable builds for the users, and not lock down the world.
IMHO I think it is the responsibility of Maven to provide a super pom
but each ASF project should define its own pluginManagement list.
WDYT?
Yes they should, but what I found in helping new projects is the
hurdle to get to a consistent ASF release was too high. This way they
can choose to use a sane set of defaults we know work for ASF projects
and go from there. Taking everything back out is just going to make
everyone's life harder.
Cheers,
Vincent
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=766947
[2]
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/components/branches/maven-2.0.x/maven-project/src/main/resources/org/apache/maven/project/pom-4.0.0.xml
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
