On Wednesday 12 May 2004 01:19, Adam R. B. Jack wrote: > But each is a separate artefact to Maven, right?
No, not a requirement, only a recommendation. > Gump is (as Leo would say) not a participant with an opinion, but a > developer emulator. Gump needs to do what developers do, so how Maven is > used depends upon the existing projects. Right now it seems that calling > the 'jar' goal is about right (although it is configurable). Yes, the goal to be called must be 'settable' in the Gump descriptor, just like you can set the target in the <ant> element. > Verses leaving things where they are, and using the jar override properties > in the build.properties (again in offline mode) as we do? Yes, the reason would be that according to Brett, all plugins doesn't support the build.properties you are refer to. It may not be a problem to do what you are doing, but it may not reflect the reality (incl, that one can access the pom.dependencies directly in one's maven.xml and do all kind of funky stuff). Niclas -- +---------//-------------------+ | http://www.bali.ac | | http://niclas.hedhman.org | +------//----------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
