Same use case here. IMHO having a distinction between "-P profile" and "-P +profile" is acceptable. "-P profile" may work as it does today (specify the exact list of profiles, whith auto-disabled default ones). For backward compatibility, but also to enable exclusive profiles switching.
2008/5/15 Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Would a concept of profile groups help to determine which profiles are > meant to be mutually exclusive? > > I use mutually exclusive profiles for different deployment > configurations, for example development and production. By default, > the development profile is actived by default, so currently > -Pproduction would disable the development profile and enable the > production profile. The proposed changes would require > -P!development,production, which is a little cumbersome and prone to > error. > > +1 for using the !-notation for disabling profiles. > > Mark > > 2008/5/14 Paul Gier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile activation > > and deactivation. While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some cases where > the > > current behaviour might be improved. > > > > > > 1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one > activeByDefault > > profile and I manually activate one of them? Currently, if I have two > > activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and profile2, and I run "mvn > -P+profile1" > > then profile1 stays active and profile2 is deactivated. This also bring > up > > the following more general question. > > > > > > 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another > profile > > is activated? I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in > > 2.0.x, but for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default > profiles > > active unless explicitly disabled. > > > > If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes sense > to > > activate one and have the default profile be deactivated. But IMO that > > seems to be a less common use case vs. using profiles to activate > particular > > parts of a build and not normally interfering with each other. In this > case > > it seems more intuitive that an activeByDefault profile is always active > > unless deactivated. In addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as > > needed from the command line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a need > to > > have activeByDefault profiles automatically turn off. > > > > > > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile. > So > > the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile > > > > This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I > > created MNG-3571 for it. But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already > > use "-" for this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as > > another option for disabling a profile in 2.1. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > >
