Here is the type of thing I was suggesting... note the GAVs have been
changed to save me looking shit up
<project>
<groupId>org.apache.openejb</groupId>
<artifactId>tomee</artifactId>
<version>1.2-SNAPSHOT</version>
...
<build>
...
<plugins>
...
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.openejb.maven</groupId>
<artifactId>wonderfull-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.1</version>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.openejb</groupId>
<artifactId>tomee</artifactId>
<version>${project.version}</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</plugin>
...
</plugins>
...
</build>
...
</project>
On 26 June 2012 11:03, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> wrote:
> ehm... you're not making sense to me...
>
> On 26 June 2012 10:12, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote:
>> depends, typically overriding by a more recent version should work, not the
>> opposite.
>
> Well I was suggesting that you use an already released version of the
> plugin, but override the plugin's dependency section in the build to
> use the version of openejb/tomee that is being built by the reactor.
>
>>
>> Currently the plugin will fail if it uses an already released version.
>
> I presume you mean if it uses a version different from that being
> built, or are these plugins purely for building openejb/tomee and of
> no general utility?
>
>>
>> - Romain
>>
>>
>> 2012/6/26 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>
>>
>>> On 25 June 2012 06:35, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Well the issue is they depend on openejb or tomee.
>>>
>>> Can that be fixed by just overriding the specific dependency version
>>> in the plugin's <dependencies> block?
>>>
>>> Then once you have openejb/tomee released, you can then release the
>>> new version of the plugin afterwards in a separate lifecycle
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Typically today the interesting plugins (not the scan.xml or jee5 -> jee6
>>> > ones) can't be released without releasing openejb and tomee.
>>> >
>>> > - Romain
>>> > Le 25 juin 2012 04:36, "Stephen Connolly" <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > a écrit :
>>> >
>>> >> You are better off pulling the maven plugins out, as a maven plugin
>>> cannot
>>> >> be consumed within the reactor that produces it (ie if there is a full
>>> GAV
>>> >> match V being critical)
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sunday, 24 June 2012, David Blevins wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Jun 22, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > IMHO, we could get out and get different life cycle for:
>>> >> > > Arquillian
>>> >> > > OSGi
>>> >> > > TomEE
>>> >> > > Maven
>>> >> > > Examples?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > We pulled out javaee-api and that went well. I suggest we take the
>>> >> simple
>>> >> > approach and try one more. Getting the CI setup in order is the
>>> tricky
>>> >> > part. The pulling is the easy part. We probably don't want to pull
>>> now
>>> >> > and work out the details of the CI system later as then we'll have
>>> some
>>> >> bad
>>> >> > breakage on our hands.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I had intended to spend the weekend working on the CI stuff but got
>>> side
>>> >> > tracked with the anonymous website editing features of CMS which are
>>> >> > probably way more important -- we even have committers who don't know
>>> how
>>> >> > to update the side, so lot's needs to be improved with that process.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Anyway, maybe Maven plugins could individually be pulled out. Each
>>> >> plugin
>>> >> > could be independently released and versioned.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > -David
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>>
