Given that all it turns out to *do* is to construct finalName, I am perfectly willing to kill it. If bentmann decides to relax his vow of never talking to us, I'm happy to hear what he says.
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> wrote: > No. Not expected to remember... But sometimes one does... especially > bentmann in my experience ;-) > > On Sunday, 25 November 2012, Anders Hammar wrote: > >> Just a check, is one supposed to remember why one did something 4.5 years >> ago? I can hardly remember what I did last week.... >> >> I'm currently searching JIRA to see if I can find a ticket that would match >> Benjamin's fix. >> >> /Anders >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > So it is not to create the shaded artifact at a different coordinate >> > without requiring the creation of an additional module? >> > >> > I agree it seems a tad insane, but if we could get bentmann to chime in >> as >> > to what it is actually supposed to do, then I think we can make a correct >> > decision... >> > >> > Of course the code may not work... Which is a different issue... >> > >> > But having to create a module with a Pom that has to be kept in sync just >> > to put the shaded artifact with dependency reduced Pom at a different >> > coordinate... Does seem wasteful... Otoh how is the reactor to know the >> > artifact will magically appear and hence produce the correct build >> plan... >> > >> > So I have nearly convinced myself that it is insane... But let's ask! >> > >> > On Sunday, 25 November 2012, Benson Margulies wrote: >> > >> > > I am fairly depressed here, and I agree with Anders. >> > > >> > > The shadedArtifactId was added in svn rev 640405 by bbentman. >> > > >> > > The log for that change consists of: >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > r640405 | bentmann | 2008-03-24 09:17:58 -0400 (Mon, 24 Mar 2008) | 1 >> > line >> > > >> > > o Added svn:eol-style=native >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > >> > > That really does not shed any light. Further, the name is completely >> > > misleading. it does not, in fact, change how the attach happens, it is >> > > just a baroque means of specifying the final name in pieces. So I >> > > modify my proposal to consist of: >> > > >> > > attach >> > > >> > > attachClassifier >> > > >> > > outputDirectory >> > > >> > > finalName >> > > >> > > no sub-objects. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Benson Margulies < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > > Anders, >> > > > >> > > > I'm willing to go on a history expedition to see who added the >> > > > feature. The MavenProjectHelper API suports this feature, let alone >> > > > the naked MavenProject API. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Anders Hammar <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >>> > How would you attach an artifact with a DIFFERENT artifactId than >> > the >> > > >>> > project? It doesn't make sense. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> This is *already* a feature of the plugin. I didn't invent it, I'm >> > > >>> just trying to clean up how your configure it. >> > > >>> >> > > >> >> > > >> Why would you try to clean up how to configure something that >> doesn't >> > > make >> > > >> sense and is plain wrong? Maven is about best-practices and we >> should >> > > help >> > > >> people do the right thing. >> > > >> >> > > >> And btw, finalName should be nuked out of the Maven world. :-) >> > > >> >> > > >> /Anders >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > I would vote for doing changes that make it impossible to use the >> > > plugin >> > > >>> as >> > > >>> > I-would-like-to-create-any-file-the-way-i-used-to-with-Ant >> > solution. >> > > I >> > > >>> > think that the possibilities to alter the final name of the built >> > > >>> artifact >> > > >>> > fools people into thinking that you can specify the name of the >> > > artifact. >> > > >>> > You migth be able to specify the name of the build file in the >> > build >> > > >>> > folder, but that's not something you should create a build >> solution >> > > >>> around. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Well, finalName in the pom it --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
