Rafal Krzewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 25/06/2003 07:19:26 AM: > I daresay that 2/3 of exising maven plugins is broken and/or orphaned. > This is obviously an unacceptable situation. I daresay you're wrong, and would love to see a change :-)
> Below there's a list of plugins taken from current website. I've put > marks next to them representing *my personal* opinion on the pluin's > condition. > > C - core - needed to perform basic tasks > M - actively maintained > O - obsoleted by other plugins > B - broken > > # ant AFAIK, this is 'M' - stable but actively maintained. > # antlr > # appserver > # artifact M C > # ashkelon > # aspectj I would put this at M > # cactus M > # castor > # changelog C M > # changes C M > # checkstyle M C > # clean C M - I changed it not long back. > # clover M > # codeswitcher > # console C > # deploy O? > # developer-activity C M > # dist C > # docbook M > # ear C M > # eclipse M > # ejb M > # examples M > # faq > # file-activity C M > # genapp M > # gump M > # hibernate > # html2xdoc > # idea > # j2ee O > # jalopy > # jar C M > # java C M > # javadoc C M > # jboss M > # jbuilder M > # jdee > # jdepend > # jdeveloper > # jdiff > # jellydoc M > # jnlp M > # junit-report M > # junitdoclet M > # jxr C > # latex > # latka M > # license C M > # linkcheck M C > # native > # pdf M > # perforce > # plexus > # plugin M > # pmd > # pom C M > # release C > # repository M C > # runner > # sea > # shell > # site > # statcvs C > # struts > # summit > # tasklist C M > # test C M > # torque > # touchstone M C > # touchstone-partner M C > # uberjar M > # vdoclet > # war M > # was40 M > # webserver O? M - peter lynch has updated this recently. > # wizard > # word2html M > # xdoc M C > > There is a few plugins there that I don't know/understand so my marks > may be off base here and there. > > It would be nice if one of the commiters checked in a plugin-map.xml > xdoc that would contain a list of plugins similar to that one above, and > then all commiters would add their name next to the plugins they are > willing to work on, and their name in ( ) next to the plugins they > know good enough to fix if they happen to break. That's what project.xml is for - if they're willing to work on it, add themselves as a developer/contributor > As for the core/obsolete status of each plugin an IRC discussion with > a sigle person writing down resolutions would probably be best. > > I second Michal's opinion that we should not put any more plugins into > maven repository, and that some of the existing one should move away > onto another CVS repo on maven.apache.org or even to the repos of > their associated software projects. I thought maven-plugin was to be the new apache cvs repo for plugins once we worked out how to declare plugin usage. > The notation for those dependencies is basicly in place, we might need > to introduce addtional artifact types for that. Here's a snippet from > a hypotetical plugin's project.xml: > > <dependencies> > <dependency> > <dependencyType>runtime</dependencyType> > <groupId>maven.apache.org</groupId> > <artifactId>maven-core-plugin</artifactId> I believe it was agreed to use <type>maven-plugin</type> -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/ Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
