Currently maven can't but I expect a way to do it, either in the next xsd as originally proposed or, why not, with a naming convention in the id of the execution (<execution>my-exec#after#other-exec</execution> or something like that if we want it before maven 4)
The nice thing is that once done it makes phases pretty much useless (it is just about making implicit these dependencies) and it makes the whole build parallelizable and not just modules which will often find some bottleneck modules in projects building a distribution. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le jeu. 6 déc. 2018 à 14:44, Mickael Istria <mist...@redhat.com> a écrit : > Hi, > > > any way we move that topic forward beginning of next year? > > I guess providing patches would be the best way ;) > > I'm coming late in this discussion and I'm a newcomer on that list, so I > could miss context. This could relate to an effort we are doing in Eclipse > IDE (and Eclipse m2e) to run module builds in parallel. One question I have > is how do you know 2 tasks aren't conflicting? We didn't figure out a safe > way to know that in m2e, maybe I missed something? > > Cheers, >
