Personally I didn't even know you could put a version into the lifecycle, I've never seen that done.
Second, I always subscribe to the theory that "closest" wins. In the inheritance case, it means things in my pom override my parent pom, which overrides the grandparent etc. I think in this case, the pom is "closer" than the lifecycle and therefore it should win as is happening in the 3.x case. In otherwords, if I use a lifecycle that defines a version but need to tweak the version how would I do it? The pom is my only vechicle for overriding it. On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu> wrote: > Sebastian Annies wrote: > >> we are using a custom lifecycle and bind the maven-source-plugin in >> version 2.1 to the verify phase. In the 2.X branch it always worked >> perfectly. But now I tried alpha-3 and 4 and it seems that Maven uses >> the maven-source-plugin in version 2.0.4 > > Confirmed and filled as http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4453. > > This is actually a controversial edge case. For instance, even if one puts > > <build> > <plugins> > <plugin> > <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> > <artifactId>maven-source-plugin</artifactId> > <version>2.0.4</version> > </plugin> > </plugins> > </build> > > in the POM, Maven 2.x will use the version defined in the lifecycle mapping, > i.e. the lifecycle mapping is dominant. That's not really what I personally > would have expected. > > So, not sure right now how we actually want Maven to behave in this case. > > > Benjamin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
