John Casey wrote: > That sparked the idea of having mixins. With mixins, I could separate > the two trees cleanly. > > I'm still a little unclear on how mixins would be "cleaner" than two > levels of inheritance. If multiple levels of inheritance confuses the > site plugin, then that plugin needs to be fixed in some way. However, I > don't think it's appropriate to address a problem that could be fixed > via rearrangement of directory structures by instead introducing a > massively complex new feature to Maven. It'd be a lot like replacing the > engine in your car just so you can get a little more torque to turn a > flat tire, rather than just fixing the tire.
I don't say that my problem can't be fixed by fixing the site plugin. I say that it got me thinking if there is a bigger problem hiding somewhere below all that. Single parent inheritance is limited. It leads to a long line of parent POMs because every time you find you need a feature in more than one project, you have to inject a new level if you don't want to "pollute" unrelated projects or if you can't (for example when you have to configure a build plugin). With mixins, I could have a single mixin file which configures all plugins and all aspects of Maven I can think of in one place. In the POMs, I could then use these superblocks as I see fit. It's probably the extension of the Maven idea: Create powerful, smart building blocks from which you can build your projects. Regards, -- Aaron "Optimizer" Digulla a.k.a. Philmann Dark "It's not the universe that's limited, it's our imagination. Follow me and I'll show you something beyond the limits." http://www.pdark.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
