Sorry,
you can see in the sources
in the first comment of the archetype-descriptor-new.xml in
the archetypeng-archetype-descriptor project.
It has been commented in the "plugin proposition" mail thread.
I copy here:
<archetype id="archetype-artifact-id" partial="true|false" >
<requiredProperties>
<requiredProperty key="propKey" defaultValue="string to
replace" />
</requiredProperties>
<fileSets>
<fileSet filtered="true|false" packaged="true|false" />
<directory>src/main/java</directory>
<includes>
<include>**/*.java</include>
</includes>
<excludes>
<exclude>Main.java</exclude>
</excludes>
</fileSet>
</file-sets>
<modules>
<module id="module-artifact-id">
<fileSets/>
<modules/>
</module>
</modules>
</archetype>
2007/4/15, Franz Allan Valencia See <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Btw, what is the proposed new descriptor format? :-)
On 4/13/07, Raphaël Piéroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/4/9, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > On 8 Apr 07, at 10:41 PM 8 Apr 07, Brett Porter wrote:
> >
> > > It seems apparent now that we should push forward with the ng
> > > stuff. I was going to test if it is at least equivalent to trunk
> > > and then propose bringing it in to replace trunk and start to plan
> > > out 1.0 from there.
> > >
> >
> > It doesn't work the same yet, the mojos are just stubbed out and I
> > have yet to get it to create an archetype though the tests are pretty
> > good so far.
>
> Really please to ear ;)
>
> I will, starting from next week, refactor the descriptor as proposed.
>
> Raphaël
>
>
> >
> > > Does anyone have any bandwidth to help with that?
> >
> > I will walk through the code in its entirety but not until next week.
> >
> > Jason.
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Brett
> > >
> > > On 09/04/2007, at 12:37 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 3/4/07, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The Archetype plugin has lost the ability to "package" non-Java
> > >>> resources. It looks like this happened with the addition of 'sub
> > >>> packages' for Java sources.
> > >>
> > >> ping. Any thoughts on whether the problem with "packaging" resources
> > >> should be fixed in the existing archetype code or whether
> > >> maven-archetypeng will be ready soon?
> > >>
> > >> It's http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/ARCHETYPE-65 .
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Wendy
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
