Hi I am not sure why mvn is downloading this version, but I guess its related cause you tried to include it as a dependency. Doxia - in that case - is not a dependency to the project and you should delete that part out. Dependencies are f.e. compile time dependencies to the project. But we don't have such.
However, which mvn version are you running? If you have 2.1, you already should have doxia 1.1.x. Just type: $ mvn --version Apache Maven 2.1.0 (r755702; 2009-03-18 20:10:27+0100) See: http://maven.apache.org/doxia/developers/maven-integration.html If that doesn't do the trick, you might have a look on that page, which should help you: http://maven.apache.org/doxia/doxia/doxia-maven-plugin/usage.html This is the correct way of configuration in the pom.xml. It means that doxia is a so called build-plugin and should have something like that within the build-tag (probably direclty under the already included rat plugin): <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.doxia</groupId> <artifactId>doxia-maven-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.1.1</version> </plugin> Let me know if that works for you :-) And yes, maven is hell, sometimes. But it really has its benefits too, once you control it. Cheers, Christian On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Christian Hammers<[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > Sometimes I wish back the good ol' Makefile... why is Maven insisting > on using doxia 1.0-alpha-11? There is no visible dependency in the > pom.xml and it does so even if I add a dependency to 1.1.1: > > <dependency> > <groupId>org.apache.maven.doxia</groupId> > <artifactId>doxia</artifactId> > <version>1.1.1</version> > <type>pom</type> > </dependency> > > $ mvn site > ... > [INFO] Building Apache log4php. [INFO] task-segment: [site] > [INFO] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Downloading: > http://mirror.netcologne.de/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-core/1.0-alpha-11/doxia-core-1.0-alpha-11.jar > ... > > The reason I want 1.0+ is that it supports %{snippet} .apt macros that > include the whole file. > > Ok, since most of the files include this big fat Apache copyright header > maybe it would indeed be better to use the "// START SNIPPET: foo" tag > but I would still be curious if anybody can explain me Maven :) > > bye, > > -christian- >
