Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
Is it possible to declare a pom as a dependency, so that its dependencies would be inherited? If that doesn't work, them maybe it should be added as an enhancement. On 2/27/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
Yeah, I do this quite a lot - for example, to abstract jdbc implementations across and organization - all jars required go into a pom project called jdbc. If you need to make an orthogonal change, just change jdbc's dependency list. Eric On 2/28/07, Thierry Lach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible to declare a pom as a dependency, so that its dependencies would be inherited? If that doesn't work, them maybe it should be added as an enhancement. On 2/27/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond
Fwd: [m2] POM Inheritance
woops, forgot to cc the group -- Forwarded message -- From: Eric Redmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Feb 28, 2007 11:53 AM Subject: Re: [m2] POM Inheritance To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's not much more to say about it. Create a pom.xml of packaging pom Give it a bunch of dependencies Install/Deploy that pom to your repository Now any project that depends on that pom project will get all of the pom project's dependencies, transatively. Eric On 2/28/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you pl elaborate on this use case? Thanks, /U -- Original message -- From: Eric Redmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yeah, I do this quite a lot - for example, to abstract jdbc implementations across and organization - all jars required go into a pom project called jdbc. If you need to make an orthogonal change, just change jdbc's dependency list. Eric On 2/28/07, Thierry Lach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible to declare a pom as a dependency, so that its dependencies would be inherited? If that doesn't work, them maybe it should be added as an enhancement. On 2/27/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version ). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond http://codehaus.org/%7Eeredmond -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond http://codehaus.org/%7Eeredmond -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
Will this work? I do not know. Introduce a third pom (the data access pom) as a new module of the original parent. The original parent pom remains unchanged except for the addition of the new data access pom module. The new data access pom declares data access dependencies. The data access modules parent is changed from the original parent to the new data access pom. Regards, John jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9226499 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
Will this work? I do not know. Introduce a third pom (the data access pom) as a new module of the original parent. The original parent pom remains unchanged except for the addition of the new data access pom module. The new data access pom declares data access dependencies. The data access modules parent is changed from the original parent to the new data access pom. Regards, John jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9226530 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
Abstract it? I don't understand. The JDBC pom is just a seperate project. Like this: JDBC POM: project ... artifactIdmy-jdbc-project/artifactId packagingpom/packaging dependencies ... add jdbc dependencies here, like mysql jdbc, or sqlserver jdbc ... /dependencies /project Then, in your project that needs to use the jdbc drivers: dependencies dependency groupId.../groupId artifactIdmy-jdbc-project/artifactId version.../version typepom/type /dependency On 2/28/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So how to you use this abstract jdbc pom file? Do you include it as a dependency in your data access modules?Do you use it as the parent of your data access modules? jp4 Eric Redmond wrote: Yeah, I do this quite a lot - for example, to abstract jdbc implementations across and organization - all jars required go into a pom project called jdbc. If you need to make an orthogonal change, just change jdbc's dependency list. Eric On 2/28/07, Thierry Lach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible to declare a pom as a dependency, so that its dependencies would be inherited? If that doesn't work, them maybe it should be added as an enhancement. On 2/27/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9226529 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
This is exactly what I was looking for. I didn't realize that you could include a typepom/type as a dependency. This makes things much cleaner. Thanks again, jp4 Eric Redmond wrote: Abstract it? I don't understand. The JDBC pom is just a seperate project. Like this: JDBC POM: project ... artifactIdmy-jdbc-project/artifactId packagingpom/packaging dependencies ... add jdbc dependencies here, like mysql jdbc, or sqlserver jdbc ... /dependencies /project Then, in your project that needs to use the jdbc drivers: dependencies dependency groupId.../groupId artifactIdmy-jdbc-project/artifactId version.../version typepom/type /dependency On 2/28/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So how to you use this abstract jdbc pom file? Do you include it as a dependency in your data access modules?Do you use it as the parent of your data access modules? jp4 Eric Redmond wrote: Yeah, I do this quite a lot - for example, to abstract jdbc implementations across and organization - all jars required go into a pom project called jdbc. If you need to make an orthogonal change, just change jdbc's dependency list. Eric On 2/28/07, Thierry Lach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible to declare a pom as a dependency, so that its dependencies would be inherited? If that doesn't work, them maybe it should be added as an enhancement. On 2/27/07, jp4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9226529 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Redmond http://codehaus.org/~eredmond -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9234650 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196293 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
I wonder if it would make sense to create a project of type jar that does nothing more than declare common dependencies like spring and hibernate. This way, by including a common data access jar file, all other data access modules would transitively include the spring and hibernate jars. Any thoughts our ideas would be greatly appreciated. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have been doing some reading and it looks like the pluginManagement section will allow me to achieve part of what I want to do with reusing plugin configurations. jp4 jp4 wrote: I have posted about this question several times before but haven't received many responses. I am hoping that someone has done or knows how to accomplish the following. Basically, I have several multi module projects. Each project defines a parent pom.xml file which contains a list of modules as well as the project's version id (all children use the parent.version). In addition, if necessary, it defines any common dependencies for it's modules. I have several projects that follow this pattern, most of which produce a deployable webapp and consist of webapp, model, data access, and service modules. For the most part, the data access modules usually share common configuration such as spring and hibernate dependencies and perhaps some common plugins. So, in the case of a data access module, I would like it's parent to be the projects' parent pom.xml file, but I would also like it to be able to inherit data access configurations from a different pom.xml file. I know that you can create an inheritance chain, but in this case, I really don't want the project's parent pom.xml file to inherit from a data access pom.xml for obvious reasons. The solution may be that I have to redefine the spring and hibernate dependencies as well as plugins in each data access project. I can do that, but I wanted to explore a more elegant solution before resorting to that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, jp4 -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3304518s177.html#a9196345 Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM Inheritance
I still haven't found a good solution for this and I was hoping to spark some
discussion with a follow up post.
jp4 wrote:
I was wondering if there is any way to achieve multiple pom inheritance
with maven. I have created several pom abstractions (i.e. data access
which includes dependencies for hibernate, spring, etc... webapp which
includes dependencies for struts, etc) for convenience as most of my data
access projects follow the same pattern using hibernate and spring. I
don't want to have to redefine these dependencies in each of my data
access projects.
Now here is where the problem comes in, I have a multi-module projectA
that has a model, data access, webapp projects. In addition, I have a
multi-module projectB that has a model, data access, webapp project. I
would like to have all modules in projectA have the same version so that I
can refer to version for projectA as ${project.version} in my model, data
access, and webapp. The problem that I have is that I want projectA's
data access project to inherit from both the data access pom as well as
the projectA pom. Is there any way to do this? Or is there a different
approach to achieve the desired results?
Thanks,
jp4
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/POM-Inheritance-tf3164691s177.html#a9107889
Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[m2] POM inheritance in a flat multiproject
Hi all, I have this directory layout: projects parent-proj pom.xml sub-proj pom.xml In parent-proj/pom.xml I have defined modules module../sub-proj/module /modules In sub-proj/pom.xml I have defined parent ... relativePath../parent-proj/relativePath /parent This works only if the sub-proj has defined a groupId identical to that of the parent-proj. Otherwise, M2 complains that it cannot find the artifact (the parent-proj POM). In a normal multi-project layout this does not happen. I.e. I can define other groupId or not define one at all and M2 will find the parent. Any comments? Adrian. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Hi, Now that alpha-2 is out, I'm trying to catch up. I'd like to apply the documentation you sent - just wanted to check whether you'd made any changes after getting those clarifications? Could you attach it to a JIRA ticket? It's preferred over email for tracking and history. Thanks, Brett On 5/5/05, J. Matthew Pryor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK so my (hopefully) last question then is How do I tell what the canonical list of 'Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin' is? Thanks for the clarification (of the clarification ;-) Matthew -Original Message- From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 3:01 AM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alright, this is the part where I print a complete retraction of everything I just emailed to the list... :) Next time, I promise, I'll actually re-read the code and/or do some Right-Click - References - Project in Eclipse for a given piece of code before I shoot my mouth off. In reality, Brett is 100% correct (he should be, he's looking at the code right now :). Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin will also trigger the configurations in pluginManagement/ on a plugin-by-plugin basis. So, in reality, both of the examples that I gave below will work to configure the compiler plugin. Sorry for the confusion, and I'll try not to yell my comments in from the other room next time. :) john John Casey wrote: I have a refinement or two to this... Brett Porter wrote: John has just made a final fix. So, to summarise the behaviour here: - pluginManagement / is inherited - configuration/ elements are merged together during inheritence - plugins/ is NOT inherited - the final plugin management values are merged into the plugins/ element of the POM being built. This is critical: the pluginManagement/ configurations are ONLY activated if you declare a corresponding plugin/ entry in the build section's plugins/ stanza. pluginManagement is an opt-in system; it will only affect your build if you specifically invite it in. Also, you cannot opt-in for all of the managed configuration at one go. To be clear: The only way to use the configuration declared within pluginManagement/ section is to declare a corresponding plugin/ entry within buildplugins//build. The minimal information necessary to link a build's actual plugin to the corresponding managed plugin information is groupId/ and artifactId/. This WILL NOT configure the source/target properties of the maven-compiler-plugin: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement /build /project The managed information will ONLY be used when you opt-in for that configuration by declaring the plugin for use in the build section, like so: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement !-- THIS IS REQUIRED TO OPT IN TO THE MANAGED CONFIGURATION. -- plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project Looking at this, I'm not 100% convinced that the implicit configuration of maven-compiler-plugin is not appropriate...the only question in that case is how to undo this configuration, which has the same answer as undoing any configuration element: don't put it in the shared configuration in the first place. All I'm attempting to do here is describe the way the current process functions...this may change in the future. The downside here is that there is no way to exclude something that has already been declared in a parent. This is intended - if you come across the situation you can redefine it with a different value, or you should not inherit the value. Why was this chosen, given the downside? The downside of going the other direction (where configuration would completely replace anything given
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the pluginManagement/ section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the plugin/ section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the pluginManagement/ section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself. NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in pluginManagement/ but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly? HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any configuration/ or goals/ element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the pluginManagement/ section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with dependencyManagement/. These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes. Hope this clears things up somewhat. :) Cheers, -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed. Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again. The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child. If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of pluginManagement sections of the parent. What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs? The parent POM looks like: project nameParent POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging modules modulechild/module /modules build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project And the child, which inherits from the parent: The build section is overridden with a different sourceDirectory and, since the plugins of the parent gets lost, it is repeated. project nameChild POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdchild/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging parent groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version /parent build sourceDirectorysrc2/sourceDirectory plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project Thanks in advance, Peter van de Hoef John Casey wrote: Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
parent and child have pluginManagement/ stuff defined): -- Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie. NOTE: There was a problem with the configuration/ of a plugin not being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's not going to be in alpha-1 obviously... :) - Combination of local POM's plugins/ with [inherited] pluginManagement/ section: -- HOW IT WORKS: configuration/ elements (both on goal/ and on plugin/) are combined, with ties going to the local configuration (if the elements collide, the local specification wins). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the pluginManagement/ section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the plugin/ section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the pluginManagement/ section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself. NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in pluginManagement/ but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly? HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any configuration/ or goals/ element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the pluginManagement/ section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with dependencyManagement/. These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes. Hope this clears things up somewhat. :) Cheers, -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed. Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again. The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child. If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of pluginManagement sections of the parent. What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs? The parent POM looks like: project nameParent POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging modules modulechild/module /modules build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project And the child, which inherits from the parent: The build section is overridden with a different sourceDirectory and, since the plugins of the parent gets lost
RE: [m2] POM inheritance
OK so my (hopefully) last question then is How do I tell what the canonical list of 'Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin' is? Thanks for the clarification (of the clarification ;-) Matthew -Original Message- From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 3:01 AM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alright, this is the part where I print a complete retraction of everything I just emailed to the list... :) Next time, I promise, I'll actually re-read the code and/or do some Right-Click - References - Project in Eclipse for a given piece of code before I shoot my mouth off. In reality, Brett is 100% correct (he should be, he's looking at the code right now :). Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin will also trigger the configurations in pluginManagement/ on a plugin-by-plugin basis. So, in reality, both of the examples that I gave below will work to configure the compiler plugin. Sorry for the confusion, and I'll try not to yell my comments in from the other room next time. :) john John Casey wrote: I have a refinement or two to this... Brett Porter wrote: John has just made a final fix. So, to summarise the behaviour here: - pluginManagement / is inherited - configuration/ elements are merged together during inheritence - plugins/ is NOT inherited - the final plugin management values are merged into the plugins/ element of the POM being built. This is critical: the pluginManagement/ configurations are ONLY activated if you declare a corresponding plugin/ entry in the build section's plugins/ stanza. pluginManagement is an opt-in system; it will only affect your build if you specifically invite it in. Also, you cannot opt-in for all of the managed configuration at one go. To be clear: The only way to use the configuration declared within pluginManagement/ section is to declare a corresponding plugin/ entry within buildplugins//build. The minimal information necessary to link a build's actual plugin to the corresponding managed plugin information is groupId/ and artifactId/. This WILL NOT configure the source/target properties of the maven-compiler-plugin: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement /build /project The managed information will ONLY be used when you opt-in for that configuration by declaring the plugin for use in the build section, like so: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement !-- THIS IS REQUIRED TO OPT IN TO THE MANAGED CONFIGURATION. -- plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project Looking at this, I'm not 100% convinced that the implicit configuration of maven-compiler-plugin is not appropriate...the only question in that case is how to undo this configuration, which has the same answer as undoing any configuration element: don't put it in the shared configuration in the first place. All I'm attempting to do here is describe the way the current process functions...this may change in the future. The downside here is that there is no way to exclude something that has already been declared in a parent. This is intended - if you come across the situation you can redefine it with a different value, or you should not inherit the value. Why was this chosen, given the downside? The downside of going the other direction (where configuration would completely replace anything given by the inherited version) was much more confusing: options set for inheritence would have disappeared from children. If anyone has any questions, please say so. J. Matthew Pryor has volunteered to help document this, so it should be available on the web site in time. Cheers, Brett On 4/28/05, Peter van de Hoef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi John, I've been away for a while and see that a lot of activity has been going on in the meantime! Since I am just an m2 newbee, I cannot oversee if the issues arround plugins and pluginManagement
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Anything executed is implied. The difference is that the plugins section can actually cause a plugin to be executed, but the equivalent management section will not. Cheers, Brett On 5/5/05, J. Matthew Pryor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK so my (hopefully) last question then is How do I tell what the canonical list of 'Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin' is? Thanks for the clarification (of the clarification ;-) Matthew -Original Message- From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 3:01 AM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alright, this is the part where I print a complete retraction of everything I just emailed to the list... :) Next time, I promise, I'll actually re-read the code and/or do some Right-Click - References - Project in Eclipse for a given piece of code before I shoot my mouth off. In reality, Brett is 100% correct (he should be, he's looking at the code right now :). Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin will also trigger the configurations in pluginManagement/ on a plugin-by-plugin basis. So, in reality, both of the examples that I gave below will work to configure the compiler plugin. Sorry for the confusion, and I'll try not to yell my comments in from the other room next time. :) john John Casey wrote: I have a refinement or two to this... Brett Porter wrote: John has just made a final fix. So, to summarise the behaviour here: - pluginManagement / is inherited - configuration/ elements are merged together during inheritence - plugins/ is NOT inherited - the final plugin management values are merged into the plugins/ element of the POM being built. This is critical: the pluginManagement/ configurations are ONLY activated if you declare a corresponding plugin/ entry in the build section's plugins/ stanza. pluginManagement is an opt-in system; it will only affect your build if you specifically invite it in. Also, you cannot opt-in for all of the managed configuration at one go. To be clear: The only way to use the configuration declared within pluginManagement/ section is to declare a corresponding plugin/ entry within buildplugins//build. The minimal information necessary to link a build's actual plugin to the corresponding managed plugin information is groupId/ and artifactId/. This WILL NOT configure the source/target properties of the maven-compiler-plugin: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement /build /project The managed information will ONLY be used when you opt-in for that configuration by declaring the plugin for use in the build section, like so: project ... build pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-1/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement !-- THIS IS REQUIRED TO OPT IN TO THE MANAGED CONFIGURATION. -- plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project Looking at this, I'm not 100% convinced that the implicit configuration of maven-compiler-plugin is not appropriate...the only question in that case is how to undo this configuration, which has the same answer as undoing any configuration element: don't put it in the shared configuration in the first place. All I'm attempting to do here is describe the way the current process functions...this may change in the future. The downside here is that there is no way to exclude something that has already been declared in a parent. This is intended - if you come across the situation you can redefine it with a different value, or you should not inherit the value. Why was this chosen, given the downside? The downside of going the other direction (where configuration would completely replace anything given by the inherited version) was much more confusing: options set for inheritence would have disappeared from children. If anyone has any questions, please say so. J. Matthew Pryor has volunteered to help document this, so it should be available
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'll try to put together a test and fix whatever's causing this. Hate to
say this again, but would you mind submitting a JIRA issue for it? :)
That'll remind me.
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying
plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or
not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is
just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be
repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section
has to be changed.
Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in
the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in
the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions
again.
The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of
the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child.
If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the
assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of
pluginManagement sections of the parent.
What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs?
The parent POM looks like:
project
nameParent POM/name
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdparent/artifactId
version1.0/version
packagingpom/packaging
modules
modulechild/module
/modules
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
/plugin
/plugins
/build
/project
And the child, which inherits from the parent:
The build section is overridden with a different sourceDirectory
and, since the plugins of the parent gets lost, it is repeated.
project
nameChild POM/name
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdchild/artifactId
version1.0/version
packagingpom/packaging
parent
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdparent/artifactId
version1.0/version
/parent
build
sourceDirectorysrc2/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
/plugin
/plugins
/build
/project
Thanks in advance,
Peter van de Hoef
John Casey wrote:
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any
plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will)
modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light of this, inherited
plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build
behavior.
We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical multiproject-style
setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
---
...
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId
version1.4/version
configuration
someParamsomeValue/someParam
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
...
---
child-pom.xml
---
...
parent
groupIdtest/groupId !-- Pretend that all of
artifactIdtest-root/artifactId| this resolves to the
version1.0/version| parent-pom.xml above --
/parent
...
build
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId !-- groupId,
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId | artifactId
/plugin | enough here.
--
/build
...
---
If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement section,
just specify it locally; more local specification in an inheritance
hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
That's all right, no problem. In that way I can add a small contribution to the
great work you are doing!
I will add some test files as attachment.
John Casey wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'll try to put together a test and fix whatever's causing this. Hate to
say this again, but would you mind submitting a JIRA issue for it? :)
That'll remind me.
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying
plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or
not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is
just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be
repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section
has to be changed.
Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in
the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in
the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions
again.
The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of
the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child.
If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the
assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of
pluginManagement sections of the parent.
What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs?
The parent POM looks like:
project
nameParent POM/name
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdparent/artifactId
version1.0/version
packagingpom/packaging
modules
modulechild/module
/modules
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
/plugin
/plugins
/build
/project
And the child, which inherits from the parent:
The build section is overridden with a different sourceDirectory
and, since the plugins of the parent gets lost, it is repeated.
project
nameChild POM/name
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdchild/artifactId
version1.0/version
packagingpom/packaging
parent
groupId_test/groupId
artifactIdparent/artifactId
version1.0/version
/parent
build
sourceDirectorysrc2/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
/plugin
/plugins
/build
/project
Thanks in advance,
Peter van de Hoef
John Casey wrote:
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any
plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will)
modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light of this, inherited
plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build
behavior.
We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical multiproject-style
setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
---
...
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId
version1.4/version
configuration
someParamsomeValue/someParam
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
...
---
child-pom.xml
---
...
parent
groupIdtest/groupId !-- Pretend that all of
artifactIdtest-root/artifactId| this resolves to the
version1.0/version| parent-pom.xml above --
/parent
...
build
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId !-- groupId,
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId | artifactId
/plugin | enough here.
--
/build
...
---
If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement section,
just specify it locally; more local specification in an inheritance
hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
}
*else*
{
/// A lot of fields are inherited, except plugins
/}
I understand that
RE: [m2] POM inheritance
From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed. Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again. The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child. If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of pluginManagement sections of the parent. What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs? The parent POM looks like: project nameParent POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging modules modulechild/module /modules build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project And the child, which inherits from the parent: The build section is overridden with a different sourceDirectory and, since the plugins of the parent gets lost, it is repeated. project nameChild POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdchild/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging parent groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version /parent build sourceDirectorysrc2/sourceDirectory plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId /plugin /plugins /build /project Thanks in advance, Peter van de Hoef John Casey wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :) Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will) modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light of this, inherited plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build behavior. We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common configuration of plugins for use within a typical multiproject-style setup. It would be used like this: parent-pom.xml - --- ... pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId version1.4/version configuration someParamsomeValue/someParam /configuration /plugin /plugins
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm looking at: - - org.apache.maven.project.inheritance.DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler - - org.apache.maven.project.injection.DefaultModelDefaultsInjector and here's what I see: - - Combination of inherited pluginManagement/ sections (both parent and child have pluginManagement/ stuff defined): - -- Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie. NOTE: There was a problem with the configuration/ of a plugin not being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's not going to be in alpha-1 obviously... :) - - Combination of local POM's plugins/ with [inherited] pluginManagement/ section: - -- HOW IT WORKS: configuration/ elements (both on goal/ and on plugin/) are combined, with ties going to the local configuration (if the elements collide, the local specification wins). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the pluginManagement/ section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the plugin/ section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the pluginManagement/ section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself. NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in pluginManagement/ but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly? HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any configuration/ or goals/ element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the pluginManagement/ section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with dependencyManagement/. These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes. Hope this clears things up somewhat. :) Cheers, - -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed. Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again. The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child. If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of pluginManagement sections of the parent. What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs? The parent POM looks like: project nameParent POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging modules modulechild/module /modules build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory pluginManagement plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Hi John, I've been away for a while and see that a lot of activity has been going on in the meantime! Since I am just an m2 newbee, I cannot oversee if the issues arround plugins and pluginManagement sections have been resolved now. So I filed the pluginManagement issue anyway (http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-362). Please ignore it if it has already been fixed now. I will try to build the latest from SVN and perform some tests with my own projects. Thanks for all the good work. Peter van de Hoef John Casey wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm looking at: - - org.apache.maven.project.inheritance.DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler - - org.apache.maven.project.injection.DefaultModelDefaultsInjector and here's what I see: - - Combination of inherited pluginManagement/ sections (both parent and child have pluginManagement/ stuff defined): - -- Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie. NOTE: There was a problem with the configuration/ of a plugin not being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's not going to be in alpha-1 obviously... :) - - Combination of local POM's plugins/ with [inherited] pluginManagement/ section: - -- HOW IT WORKS: configuration/ elements (both on goal/ and on plugin/) are combined, with ties going to the local configuration (if the elements collide, the local specification wins). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the pluginManagement/ section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the plugin/ section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the pluginManagement/ section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself. NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in pluginManagement/ but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly? HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any configuration/ or goals/ element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the pluginManagement/ section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with dependencyManagement/. These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes. Hope this clears things up somewhat. :) Cheers, - -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The plugins section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed. Now, I have specified a pluginManagement section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again. The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the pluginManagement section of the parent into the child. If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of pluginManagement sections of the parent. What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs? The parent POM looks like: project nameParent POM/name groupId_test/groupId artifactIdparent/artifactId version1.0/version packagingpom/packaging modules modulechild/module /modules build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
John has just made a final fix. So, to summarise the behaviour here: - pluginManagement / is inherited - configuration/ elements are merged together during inheritence - plugins/ is NOT inherited - the final plugin management values are merged into the plugins/ element of the POM being built. The downside here is that there is no way to exclude something that has already been declared in a parent. This is intended - if you come across the situation you can redefine it with a different value, or you should not inherit the value. Why was this chosen, given the downside? The downside of going the other direction (where configuration would completely replace anything given by the inherited version) was much more confusing: options set for inheritence would have disappeared from children. If anyone has any questions, please say so. J. Matthew Pryor has volunteered to help document this, so it should be available on the web site in time. Cheers, Brett On 4/28/05, Peter van de Hoef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi John, I've been away for a while and see that a lot of activity has been going on in the meantime! Since I am just an m2 newbee, I cannot oversee if the issues arround plugins and pluginManagement sections have been resolved now. So I filed the pluginManagement issue anyway (http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-362). Please ignore it if it has already been fixed now. I will try to build the latest from SVN and perform some tests with my own projects. Thanks for all the good work. Peter van de Hoef John Casey wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm looking at: - - org.apache.maven.project.inheritance.DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler - - org.apache.maven.project.injection.DefaultModelDefaultsInjector and here's what I see: - - Combination of inherited pluginManagement/ sections (both parent and child have pluginManagement/ stuff defined): - -- Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie. NOTE: There was a problem with the configuration/ of a plugin not being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's not going to be in alpha-1 obviously... :) - - Combination of local POM's plugins/ with [inherited] pluginManagement/ section: - -- HOW IT WORKS: configuration/ elements (both on goal/ and on plugin/) are combined, with ties going to the local configuration (if the elements collide, the local specification wins). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the pluginManagement/ section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the plugin/ section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the pluginManagement/ section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself. NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in pluginManagement/ but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly? HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any configuration/ or goals/ element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the pluginManagement/ section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with dependencyManagement/. These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes. Hope this clears things up somewhat. :) Cheers, - -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: From the docs here http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the pluginManagement/ element Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire definition here. So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent pluginManagement/, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition? Also am I understanding correctly that buildplugins/ setting are never inherited? BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification jmp -Original Message- From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance Hi John, Thanks for your help. So pluginManagement is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether
[m2] POM inheritance
Hi all, I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by derived POM's. In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies the source directory and some parameters for the java compiler: build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /build In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new build section is specified: build sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory /build The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM, but it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I do not specify a build section in the derived POM, the settings of the base POM are inherited. It appears that the build section is (completely) inherited if it is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is specified in the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown away and only the settings of the derived POM are used. Is this correct? Thanks in advance. Peter van de Hoef - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Okay, I have added the issue: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-357 Thanks for your time! - Peter John Casey wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It's entirely possible that our inheritance mechanism isn't completely right on this...can you please file a JIRA issue, and I'll look at it when I have some slack time. Thanks, - -john Peter van de Hoef wrote: Hi all, I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by derived POM's. In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies the source directory and some parameters for the java compiler: build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /build In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new build section is specified: build sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory /build The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM, but it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I do not specify a build section in the derived POM, the settings of the base POM are inherited. It appears that the build section is (completely) inherited if it is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is specified in the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown away and only the settings of the derived POM are used. Is this correct? Thanks in advance. Peter van de Hoef - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCbpDFK3h2CZwO/4URAiSnAJ9PEOiV+B3sG8oLg7dYQb/v8eSYHgCfYYdi jEQmZWa6JwLyEDZhSoYiw3E= =gP0+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote: Hi all, I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by derived POM's. The law on inheritance resides here: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven- project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217sortdir=downview=log In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies the source directory and some parameters for the java compiler: build sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory plugins plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version configuration source1.5/source target1.5/target /configuration /plugin /plugins /build In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new build section is specified: build sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory /build The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM, but it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I do not specify a build section in the derived POM, the settings of the base POM are inherited. It appears that the build section is (completely) inherited if it is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is specified in the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown away and only the settings of the derived POM are used. Is this correct? We selectively choose what to inherit and the configuration for the plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form configurations essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the configurations but this might not work generally so if we need to allow the plugin to determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll probably have to come up with some way to decide this using notations we have for plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue so we'll take a look at it. -- jvz. Jason van Zyl jason at maven.org http://maven.apache.org People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples. Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more examples you look at, the more general your framework will be. -- Ralph Johnson Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
}
*else*
{
/// A lot of fields are inherited, except plugins
/}
I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since Maven does
not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
inheritance rules.
Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete plugins section if it
is not specified in the child, just like you do with resources and
testResources?
That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no
build section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the build
settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
- Peter
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by
derived POM's.
The law on inheritance resides here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217sortdir=downview=log
In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies the source
directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/build
In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new build
section is specified:
build
sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory
/build
The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM, but
it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it starts
e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I do not
specify a build section in the derived POM, the settings of the base
POM are inherited.
It appears that the build section is (completely) inherited if it is
not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is specified in
the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown away and only
the settings of the derived POM are used.
Is this correct?
We selectively choose what to inherit and the configuration for the
plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form configurations
essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the configurations
but this might not work generally so if we need to allow the plugin to
determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll probably
have to come up with some way to decide this using notations we have for
plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue so we'll take a look at
it.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any
plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will)
modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light of this, inherited
plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build
behavior.
We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical multiproject-style
setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
- ---
...
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId
version1.4/version
configuration
someParamsomeValue/someParam
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
...
- ---
child-pom.xml
- ---
...
parent
groupIdtest/groupId !-- Pretend that all of
artifactIdtest-root/artifactId| this resolves to the
version1.0/version| parent-pom.xml above --
/parent
...
build
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId !-- groupId,
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId | artifactId
/plugin | enough here.
--
/build
...
- ---
If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement section,
just specify it locally; more local specification in an inheritance
hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
}
*else*
{
/// A lot of fields are inherited, except plugins
/}
I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since Maven does
not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
inheritance rules.
Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete plugins section if it
is not specified in the child, just like you do with resources and
testResources?
That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no
build section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the build
settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
- Peter
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question about which elements of the POM are inherited by
derived POM's.
The law on inheritance resides here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217sortdir=downview=log
In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies the source
directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/build
In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new
build section is specified:
build
sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory
/build
The overridden source directory is effectuated in this second POM,
but it appears that the java compiler settings have disappeared (it
starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like assertions). If I
do not specify a build section in the derived POM, the settings of
the base POM are inherited.
It appears that the build section is (completely) inherited if it
is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is
specified in the derived POM, everything from the base POM is thrown
away and only the settings of the derived POM are used.
Is this correct?
We selectively choose what to inherit and the configuration for the
plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form configurations
essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the configurations
but this might not work generally so if we need to allow the plugin to
determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll probably
have to come up with some way to decide this using notations we have for
plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue so we'll take a look at
it.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [m2] POM inheritance
As this *VITAL* information flies by on the mailing list, is there anyone
updating the docs.
I'd be happy to work up some of it into confluence or some such if that will
help
Matthew
-Original Message-
From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:14 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance
of any plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can
(and usually will) modify the build lifecycle for that
project. In light of this, inherited plugin configuration
could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build behavior.
We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical
multiproject-style setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
- ---
...
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId
version1.4/version
configuration
someParamsomeValue/someParam
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
...
- ---
child-pom.xml
- ---
...
parent
groupIdtest/groupId !-- Pretend that all of
artifactIdtest-root/artifactId| this resolves to the
version1.0/version| parent-pom.xml above --
/parent
...
build
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId !-- groupId,
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId | artifactId
/plugin |
enough here.
--
/build
...
- ---
If you need to override some setting from the
pluginManagement section, just specify it locally; more local
specification in an inheritance hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
}
*else*
{
/// A lot of fields are inherited, except plugins
/}
I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since
Maven does
not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
inheritance rules.
Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete plugins
section if
it is not specified in the child, just like you do with resources
and testResources?
That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no
build section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the
build settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
- Peter
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question about which elements of the POM are
inherited by
derived POM's.
The law on inheritance resides here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultMod
elInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217sortdir=downview=log
In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies
the source
directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/build
In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new
build section is specified:
build
sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory
/build
The overridden source directory is effectuated in this
second POM,
but it appears that the java compiler settings have
disappeared (it
starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like
assertions). If
I do not specify a build section in the derived POM,
the settings
of the base POM are inherited.
It appears that the build section is (completely)
inherited if it
is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is
specified in the derived POM, everything from the base
POM is thrown
away and only the settings of the derived POM are used.
Is this correct?
We selectively choose what to inherit and the
configuration for the
plug-ins are a little trickier because
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I actually am working on doco for the various management features. I
know this is vital, and it's not escaping in the confusion. The
documentation is coming, please bear with us. This is still pre-beta
software, after all...
- -john
J. Matthew Pryor wrote:
As this *VITAL* information flies by on the mailing list, is there anyone
updating the docs.
I'd be happy to work up some of it into confluence or some such if that will
help
Matthew
-Original Message-
From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:14 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance
of any plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can
(and usually will) modify the build lifecycle for that
project. In light of this, inherited plugin configuration
could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build behavior.
We have a pluginManagement/ section of the POM for common
configuration of plugins for use within a typical
multiproject-style setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml
---
...
pluginManagement
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId
version1.4/version
configuration
someParamsomeValue/someParam
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/pluginManagement
...
---
child-pom.xml
---
...
parent
groupIdtest/groupId !-- Pretend that all of
artifactIdtest-root/artifactId| this resolves to the
version1.0/version| parent-pom.xml above --
/parent
...
build
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugin/groupId !-- groupId,
artifactIdmaven-something-plugin/artifactId | artifactId
/plugin |
enough here.
--
/build
...
---
If you need to override some setting from the
pluginManagement section, just specify it locally; more local
specification in an inheritance hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete build section is inherited when it is
absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* )
{
child.setBuild( parentBuild );
}
*else*
{
/// A lot of fields are inherited, except plugins
/}
I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since
Maven does
not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
inheritance rules.
Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete plugins
section if
it is not specified in the child, just like you do with resources
and testResources?
That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no
build section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the
build settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
- Peter
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question about which elements of the POM are
inherited by
derived POM's.
The law on inheritance resides here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/DefaultMod
elInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217sortdir=downview=log
In my parent POM I have a build section which specifies
the source
directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
build
sourceDirectorysrc/sourceDirectory
plugins
plugin
groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId
artifactIdmaven-compiler-plugin/artifactId
version1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT/version
configuration
source1.5/source
target1.5/target
/configuration
/plugin
/plugins
/build
In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new
build section is specified:
build
sourceDirectorymodule/src/sourceDirectory
/build
The overridden source directory is effectuated in this
second POM,
but it appears that the java compiler settings have
disappeared (it
starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like
assertions). If
I do not specify a build section in the derived POM,
the settings
of the base POM are inherited.
It appears that the build section is (completely)
inherited if it
is not present in the derived POM, but if a build section is
specified in the derived POM, everything from the base
POM is thrown
away and only the settings
RE: [m2] POM inheritance
I actually am working on doco for the various management features. I know this is vital, and it's not escaping in the confusion. The documentation is coming, please bear with us. This is still pre-beta software, after all... Totally understood, hence the offer of help. I very much appreciate that you guys are doing a stellar job here. Being practical, out in the wild is out in the wild and no amount of hand waving and beta-warning will prevent some people from forming impressions. I think it is fair to say that the importance of great documentation can't be over-estimated so I'd be happy to help out anywhere it might be needed. Imagine beta-software with release quality docs ;-) Matthew - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've started writing a large-project management overview, and I'm queued up on the managedDependencies doc (I have a blog entry waiting to go out for when it's done ;) Beyond that, pleased to have the help! - -john Brett Porter wrote: Being practical, out in the wild is out in the wild and no amount of hand waving and beta-warning will prevent some people from forming impressions. I think it is fair to say that the importance of great documentation can't be over-estimated so I'd be happy to help out anywhere it might be needed. We'll take you up on that - thanks for the offer. http://maven.apache.org/maven2/docs-required.html Just let us know what you'd like to work on so we make sure we aren't conflicting. John, have you started on the management doco already? Imagine beta-software with release quality docs ;-) Sure - we've made a commitment to work on that. - Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCbtFhK3h2CZwO/4URAjEiAJ44+WkP0cmlvXGHA9bmM0a7lJ8SEQCfaPhe 2yeRuUS3fypHL0uNsL7BXms= =ef31 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Tell me when we should take this off-list, but are: # plugin management # plugin configuration safe areas to work? That is the basic topic we were discussing. Also what format should I work in? Cheers, jmp --- John Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've started writing a large-project management overview, and I'm queued up on the managedDependencies doc (I have a blog entry waiting to go out for when it's done ;) Beyond that, pleased to have the help! - -john Brett Porter wrote: Being practical, out in the wild is out in the wild and no amount of hand waving and beta-warning will prevent some people from forming impressions. I think it is fair to say that the importance of great documentation can't be over-estimated so I'd be happy to help out anywhere it might be needed. We'll take you up on that - thanks for the offer. http://maven.apache.org/maven2/docs-required.html Just let us know what you'd like to work on so we make sure we aren't conflicting. John, have you started on the management doco already? Imagine beta-software with release quality docs ;-) Sure - we've made a commitment to work on that. - Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCbtFhK3h2CZwO/4URAjEiAJ44+WkP0cmlvXGHA9bmM0a7lJ8SEQCfaPhe 2yeRuUS3fypHL0uNsL7BXms= =ef31 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [m2] POM inheritance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think those are perfect places to start, and we're working in xdoc. dunno if you're familiar with that from m1, but it's a modified version of html with some shorthands for document layout...let me know if you have questions. Brett, any other thoughts? - -john J. Matthew Pryor wrote: Tell me when we should take this off-list, but are: # plugin management # plugin configuration safe areas to work? That is the basic topic we were discussing. Also what format should I work in? Cheers, jmp --- John Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've started writing a large-project management overview, and I'm queued up on the managedDependencies doc (I have a blog entry waiting to go out for when it's done ;) Beyond that, pleased to have the help! -john Brett Porter wrote: Being practical, out in the wild is out in the wild and no amount of hand waving and beta-warning will prevent some people from forming impressions. I think it is fair to say that the importance of great documentation can't be over-estimated so I'd be happy to help out anywhere it might be needed. We'll take you up on that - thanks for the offer. http://maven.apache.org/maven2/docs-required.html Just let us know what you'd like to work on so we make sure we aren't conflicting. John, have you started on the management doco already? Imagine beta-software with release quality docs ;-) Sure - we've made a commitment to work on that. - Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCbwsvK3h2CZwO/4URAkrgAJ49L/pG8BG/iwYZjIC0AYhrsLzluQCfeYsz jBr1m6EGfq+qUjxEXLBvY6U= =hIRH -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
