I'm trying to think about the questions of what might go into pom5, and I realized that I am confused about the current design.
M3 deprecated 'reporting' but not 'scm'. I don't see the logic. I propose to divide all POM content into two categories: things read by the core of maven, and things read by plugins. The rationale for eliminating reporting, as I thought I understood it, was that it was 'only read by a plugin.' Well, scm, licensing, distribution management, resources, ... most of the POM is 'only read by a plugin.' Sometimes by plugins that are called out in the superpom, and sometimes not. scm strikes me particularly as a target: It's used for three things, and those things can be in conflict. One is to produce a human-readable report about where humans can find the source, another is to give the release plugin enough information to tag a release, and the third is to provide defaults to the maven-scm-plugin. We wouldn't be having this painful discussion about how to make git work if the second item had just been handled by configuration in the release plugin itself instead of being a top-level element. On the other hand, we'd be having a problem allowing for the 'base my url on my parent's url'. Can someone clarify this for me? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
