another try... the proposal is here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/POM+Element+for+Source+File+Encoding
I did the work on 2 plugins in a branch: - jxr: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=645260&view=rev - javadoc: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=645262&view=rev As you can see, the change on plugins themselves is really tiny: it's much about convention, little about code. Sample use is in the branch too, to let Maven developers see the concrete positive impact on users: - actually every plugin has to be configured separately (pom is bigger), each one having its own parameter name for encoding (confusion): http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/sandbox/branches/MNG-2216/before/pom.xml?view=markup - after the plugin change, there is one property that every plugin uses as a default value, hiding the fact that the parameter name is different for each plugin: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/sandbox/branches/MNG-2216/after/pom.xml?view=markup There is still exactly the same work to be done on at least 7 other Apache plugins and 4 Codehaus ones. The change on some plugins will represent more code, since they don't even support an encoding parameter yet, but the proposal on which we need to agree is about the convention to unify the parameter's value. IMHO the actual work on 2 plugins shows everything. I think it is sufficient to adopt, or reject, or transform, any aspect of the proposal. Any objection before I begin the changes on plugin trunks? Hervé --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
