Brett Porter wrote:
That said, there will be the ability to make changes for 1.1, so we should decide whether it is really needed.
You can use a property now to get this happening - I have no problem with that.
I don't believe a <comment> element under a dependency is really necessary. The use cases I see are:
- describe why this project has such a dependency
- describe what the dependency is
The first can be done with an inline XML comment, and I don't see the value of automatically including it on the site.
The second will be solved properly by transitive dependencies, where you read the <description/> of the dependency's project.
So I don't see the need to add the element myself, and also there are the reasons against making dependency different to the project that I've listed earlier (or in another thread recently, I'm not sure).
I don't think that XML comments are sufficient here.
First of all I'd like to see those comments propagated to documenatation (website, pdf etc) sometimes they are quite important...
But there are purely technical reasons against XML comments.
We are trying to make POM independent from XML representation - it can be kept for example in the database.
We will have tools which will operate on POMs and change some values in them and serialize them back to XML files.
This will be a case for example for a tool which will help to make releases.
Ideally after all those operations any information kept in POM which is not changed should be left untouched.
To make it possible we should stay away from any xml-ish stuff (comments, entities etc)
regards
Michal
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nudzisz sie? Zagraj sobie! >>> http://link.interia.pl/f183d
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
