If I understand what you've written correctly, you wish to build/release only parts of your project.
If that is the case, then I a'd advise you to split the projects to in two separate ones, each with their own trunk etc. That way when you check out from a tag, you'll be building everything correctly, the maven way. -Chris On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:12 PM, [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > But thanks for that hint to check 2.3.2 ... I'll have a look at that this > weekend :-) > > ________________________________________ > Von: Robert Scholte [[email protected]] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Februar 2013 11:59 > An: Maven Developers List > Betreff: Re: Update release plugin to allow more fine-grained releases > > Be aware that you can't determine with which arguments the deploy was done. > So if you check out the sources from tag, how should you re-install these > projects? > It should be as simple as 'mvn install'. > This means that the projects you don't want to release should keep their > -SNAPSHOT version. > There's a good chance that this has changed with m-release-p 2.4, since > it checks the value of the release and development versions. Until now > nobody had problems with it and that's a good thing. > So maybe 2.3.2 is a better version for you, so you can keep the > unreleasable projects on their old SNAPSHOT version. > > Robert > > Op Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:30:39 +0100 schreef [email protected] > <[email protected]>: > > > Hi, > > > > I was experimenting a little with the release plugin. > > > > In one of my experiments I gave it a really long list of dev- and > > release-versions for a lot of artifacts using the "-Dproject.rel." and > > "-Dproject.dev." properties. Then I limited my maven build to only > > process a hand full of modules. > > > > What I was expecting, was that in the modules in the reactor the > > versions I provided would have been used to update the versions of all > > the artifacts I provided the plugin with. But I had to realize that the > > artifact versions of only the artifacts in the reactor were updated, but > > also for the modules that were not included. > > > > I find this way of processing quite problematic. > > > > I would volunteer to have a look at the plugin and whip up a patch. But > > I guess this only makes sense, if there is a chance of my work actually > > being accepted. > > > > What do you think about this? > > > > Chris > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] > >
