On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:00:47 +0800, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any reason not to modify the inheritence to remove the entity?
Just the history of inheritance not quite working. > http://maven.apache.org/faq.html#using-entities > (I need to update this entry to mention that inheritence can be used as a > solution). I've never understood removing the ability to use a standard XML feature. I understand why it would be discouraged, but removing seems wrong. > I think something like this in terms of hierarchy: > > commons-build/project.xml > | > +-> jelly/shared-dependencies.xml > | > +-> jelly/project.xml > +-> jelly-tags/project.xml > > So shared-dependencies.xml would look like: > <!-- LICENSE GOES HERE --> > <project> > <extend>../commons-build/project.xml</extend> > <dependencies> > ... > </dependencies> > </project> > > And the other project.xml files would extend that instead of commons-build, > and > omit the entity. > > WDYT? Sounds good. I've reverted to using 1.0.1 anyway as 1.1-SNAPSHOT of maven has issues ATM. -- http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
