Joseph Hindsley wrote: >So is there any merit to these thoughts? Or do they express something >that would make project management too cumbersome? > > > Hi Joseph,
I think they were generally on the right track, but let me share how I see distributions working, and see if they agree. Most of this will only apply to Maven 2.0 and up, however. Basically, distributions are something we've been referring to as "derived" artifacts. The primary goal of a project is not to build a distribution - it is to build something else. However, a distribution can be built alongside it, and attached to the main artifact and its pom. In the case where a probject actually is only building a distribution, that works too, because the primary artifact becomes the pom, and the distribution is just attached to that. What this means is that any additional artifacts generated are all tied to the original groupID and artifactID, and the original POM. Together they are all considered one entity. Eg. if you produce an EJB (primary), you also produce an EJB client (derived), but they come from the same source so are considered one project. When it comes to depending, you can depend on the individual parts - ie the distribution, the ejb-client, etc. More information about how this should be processed is discussed in: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-257 It has not yet been fully implemented. Thoughts? Cheers, Brett --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
