On 13/01/2010, at 1:23 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 2010-01-12, at 5:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote: > >> >> On 13/01/2010, at 7:53 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote: >> >>> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>>> The site stuff needs to be completely decoupled from releases. It such a >>>> horrible coupling and causes nothing but problems. Release and the >>>> documentation that goes along with it are completely separate. >>> >>> That might be so, but the site descriptor is needed for (site) >>> inheritance reasons and therefor needs to be deployed to the repo. >> >> Yep, that's right. >> > > No. It doesn't. I'm not planning on using the site plugin or Maven 3 and no > one should have this stuff baked in by default. So now we can't use PGP > validation because the site descriptor doesn't work which has nothing to do > with trying to get the build deployed.
I think we've crossed the streams - Dennis is talking about about how it works today, with Maven 2.2.1 - something needs to be fixed for that. It looks like this was a bug in the way the site descriptor was attached (otherwise it could have affected other use cases you might consider more legitimate :) As for Maven 3, I already agreed with you on decoupling it by default. > >> It's not actually coupled to the release, it is coupled to the POM >> lifecycle. I agree with Jason that that isn't the best, so probably in 3.0 >> that goal needs to be added to your POM by hand when you have a site >> descriptor to deploy (or the site plugin might change how it does things in >> some other way). >> >> I don't agree with the statement "release and the documentation that goes >> along with it are completely separate", as I find that a useful way to work >> in general, and it is fundamental to publishing things like Javadoc and JXR, >> however it isn't really relevant to this problem as you've said. >> > > I'll qualify that and say completely separate actions. In many cases > documentation is not necessarily generated by Maven. Another process may tie > these things together but it should not happen in the build. Sure... by default. Flipping to user mode - I would still like to use Maven to tie those things together, and in the instance where the documentation is generated by a Maven plugin (whether it be the site, dependency pulling docs from a repository, docbook, whatever), I'd like to retain the ability to have that in a single versioned build. Having them as some kind of sub-build where each is a separate action but you can still tie it all together is a possible alternative to the lifecycle interweaving mess. But this is way off in the future stuff - as long as Maven 3 can still do what I do today in some way it's all good. - Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
