On Nov 1, 2006, at 5:17 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 2 Nov 06, at 6:02 AM 2 Nov 06, Wendy Smoak wrote:
How should I do this if I can't depend on execution order?
Ultimately this should be setup in a custom lifecycle so that it
becomes a recipe for using Selenium with Maven in addition to
everyone repeating this setup in their POM. Here we could probably
make some fake packaging so that we would wire up a lifecycle but I
think your example here indicates a need for a lifecycle that may
not necessarily be associated with a packaging. With a custom
lifecycle you have strick control over the ordering of goal execution.
That's a pretty aggressive solution for something that most people
probably try to solve intuitively with simple ordering. I'm not
saying that what you are proposing here isn't without merit
(especially in more complex situations), but the best systems always
have more than one way to do common things. I'd propose it's best to
do both and it should be solved in 2.0.5, so maybe that's sufficient
if an integration test was created to lock down the semantics.
Kenney's point about inheritance is good though. An <order> element
is worth considering.
Don't take my comments here as an inability to spend the time
digesting and using what you propose, but as a desire to share
responsibilities for the build with other people in the company. The
current build complexity (EJB builds with unique packaging and
integration test requirements) is already making it very hard to get
others excited about using it. Adding additional projects to the mix
requires that much more understanding and makes it that much longer
until others can work on the build.
-b
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
