John E. Conlon wrote:
Yes. I see it when I run the ant build which uses the two pom.xmls
underneath. I would not have caught it if the build would have
completed.(and that can happen if one already has an older snapshot in
the repository, one that a latter project requires. This can induce
hard to find bugs.)
In order to keep the sequence as I noted I had to split
pom-old-plugin.xml in to
3 files. The first builds all modules up to ipojo.arch, the second
just ipojo.arch the third all the rest. AFAIK the bug kicks in when
more than two packaging types are uses in the multiproject. In this
case ipojo has does a <packaging>ipojo-bundle</packaging> which
triggers the bug.
The goal of the original two pom files was to put iPOJO last. I believe
as long as iPOJO is last, then we can avoid the bug. Could you test that
in your workspace? If you can arrange pom-old-plugin.xml with iPOJO last
and avoid the problem, then create an issue an attach your new
pom-old-plugin.xml and we will commit.
Anyone know when maven developers will fix this blocker? (It's
labeled Major, but it should be Blocker - Hey were forced to use Ant
here!)
I don't know if they consider it a blocker, but they should...I voted
for it on their site.
-> richard
