[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MSHARED-1327?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17783407#comment-17783407
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on MSHARED-1327:
-----------------------------------------
kriegaex commented on PR #26:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-reporting-impl/pull/26#issuecomment-1797056331
> would you keep it in the build output dir directory? What is your opinion
on the clutter?
My use case with AspectJ reporting is a multi-page report, for which always
a subdirectory is created anyway. Honestly, when fixing the ITs here, I did not
check whether there was additional clutter written into the build directory,
because I think that each mojo writing more than a single file - say PDF, HTML
or whatever - ought to take care of creating a subdir for itself anyway,
because the same clutter would also end up in the reporting directory with the
old default, dangerously mixing with the output of other plugins. So arguably,
the demo plugin in the IT does not behave well.
> Change output directory default in AbstractMavenReport
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MSHARED-1327
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MSHARED-1327
> Project: Maven Shared Components
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: maven-reporting-impl
> Affects Versions: maven-reporting-impl-4.0.0-M11
> Reporter: Alexander Kriegisch
> Assignee: Michael Osipov
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: maven-reporting-impl-4.0.0-M12
>
>
> The output directory should default to {{${project.build.directory}}} instead
> of {{${project.reporting.outputDirectory}}}. Quoting my reasoning from
> https://github.com/apache/maven-jxr/commit/ae81a34ac616bf7e4ea4fa9d4eb09f0979eaccb1#commitcomment-130639906:
> {quote}
> (...) because the latter is simply wrong IMO. For stand-alone mojo execution,
> a plugin should not mess with Maven Site's default directory. Imagine a
> situation in which each module should get its own, self-consistent report
> when called stand-alone, but the site should contain an aggregate with a
> different structure or maybe no report from that plugin at all. The default
> would then pollute the site directory. This is why on the ML I asked you
> ([~michaelo]), if overriding a {{@Parameter}} annotation on a base class
> field by another {{@Parameter}} annotation on a setter in a subclass it is
> the right or canonical way to implement such a default override.
> BTW, like I also said before, Maven Javadoc Plugin, even though it does not
> use the abstract base class, implements the default correctly: build dir for
> stand-alone, report dir in site generation context.
> {quote}
> The javadoc is, BTW, still correct and does not need to be changed: In a site
> generation context, the reporting base directory will be set here
> automatically without any further changes due to:
> {code:java}
> @Override
> public void setReportOutputDirectory(File reportOutputDirectory) {
> this.reportOutputDirectory = reportOutputDirectory;
> this.outputDirectory = reportOutputDirectory;
> }
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
