The second wasn't involved in this case. The first was. On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > Yes, most likely. There are a bunch of JIRAs for the Site Plugin about > issues like the one you're experiencing. The two things that stands out > from memory are: > > - aggregate reporting plugins (like Javadoc in your example) > - using the "new" way of configuring reporting plugins, i.e. under the > Site Plugin's configuration> element > > I try to stay away from both if I can... > > On 2012-11-19 14:31, Benson Margulies wrote: >> Or is this the real villan: >> >> [DEBUG] Lifecycle site -> [pre-site, site, post-site, site-deploy] >> [INFO] >> [INFO] >>> maven-javadoc-plugin:2.9:aggregate (report:aggregate) @ accumulo >> >>> >> [INFO] >> [INFO] >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [INFO] Forking accumulo 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT >> [INFO] >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Does the below show the enforcer plugin, of all things, forking? >>> >>> [DEBUG] Configuring mojo >>> 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0.1:enforce' with >>> basic configurator --> >>> [DEBUG] (s) fail = true >>> [DEBUG] (s) failFast = false >>> [DEBUG] (f) ignoreCache = false >>> [DEBUG] (s) project = MavenProject: >>> org.apache.accumulo:accumulo:1.5.0-SNAPSHOT @ >>> /Users/benson/asf/accumulo/pom.xml >>> [DEBUG] (s) version = [2.2.0,) >>> [DEBUG] (s) rules = >>> [org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.RequireMavenVersion@42c31c7d] >>> [DEBUG] (s) session = org.apache.maven.execution.MavenSession@409bad4f >>> [DEBUG] (s) skip = false >>> [DEBUG] -- end configuration -- >>> [DEBUG] Executing rule: >>> org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.RequireMavenVersion >>> [DEBUG] Rule org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.RequireMavenVersion is >>> cacheable. >>> [DEBUG] Detected Maven Version: 3.0.4 >>> [DEBUG] Detected Maven Version: 3.0.4 is allowed in the range [2.2.0,). >>> [INFO] >>> [INFO] >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> [INFO] Forking cloudtrace 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT >>> [INFO] >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Barrie Treloar <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Benson Margulies >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Barrie, I understand this much, but what I don't understand is what to >>>>> do about it. Is there any choice other than to stop using reporting >>>>> plugins that do the forking? Or can I put the executions of them ahead >>>>> of site:site on the command line or something? >>>> >>>> I think the technical term is SOL. >>>> Unless there is a "no-fork" variant of the goal. >>>> >>>> I've only noticed this to be a problem more recently so I haven't had >>>> the time to give it much more thought. >>>> The knee jerk reaction is that "fork" should be deprecated and >>>> replaced with an alternative model. >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> 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] >> > > > -- > Dennis Lundberg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
