I have a question to the old phases in CLI.
I will use the phase "post-site" in my examples.
$ mvn post-site
What did we expect from "post-site" and why we supported it in CLI?
>From my point of view, it is a bad use. I used it as well because I
expected Maven to run "post-site" after
$ mvn site
On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 22:48, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> I am referring to this sentence:
> "The logic of using : in these prefix names is that it would expressly be
> impossible to invoke these dynamic pseudo phases from the CLI as Maven will
> interpret any attempt to invoke them as
I am referring to this sentence:
"The logic of using : in these prefix names is that it would expressly be
impossible to invoke these dynamic pseudo phases from the CLI as Maven will
interpret any attempt to invoke them as $plugin:$goal and look for a
maven-before-plugin or maven-after-plugin".
On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 21:41, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> The fixed phases were one of the main strengths of Maven, and with this
> automatism it could really be enhanced.
>
> My dislike: the `before:goal` invocation is being "projected" to non
> existent plugin invocation. This sounds like a hack.
On Tue 22 Oct 2019 at 11:30, Elliotte Rusty Harold
wrote:
> The docs at
> https://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependency_Version_Requirement_Specification
> say:
>
> 1.0: "Soft" requirement on 1.0 (just a recommendation, if it matches
> all other ranges for the dependency)
> [1.0]: "Hard"
The fixed phases were one of the main strengths of Maven, and with this
automatism it could really be enhanced.
My dislike: the `before:goal` invocation is being "projected" to non
existent plugin invocation. This sounds like a hack. Could we clear that
part up?
T
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:23
Le 25/10/2019 à 21:01, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases
>
> Thoughts?
Sounds interesting. You may want to forbid the before/after prefix on
the deprecated phases (such as after:pre-clean).
The name of the phases use to start with a
I like
package[2000]
because it solves my problems when I had to order plugins to reach exactly
this feature. Even impossible to do it if plugins use different phases,
then ordering of plugins would not help.
The syntax package[2000] will solve this!
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:36 PM Romain
Hi Stephen,
I like the priority a lot and shortcut syntax - not having -
sounds a good compromise on user side (inline is always appreciated) and
impl side (no model change).
Romain
Le ven. 25 oct. 2019 à 21:02, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
Robert,
I would be fine splitting out into, pardon the pun, phases:
Phase 1: before and after
Phase 2: priorities
Phase 3: transitional lifecycle
Might have a phase 1.5 of before:* and after:* to catch the start of a
lifecycle and the end of a lifecycle...
On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:30, Stephen
Robert, Michael, Tibor, let’s continue here (though I asked Infra and it’s
fine that anyone in the community can join our Slack)
On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:01, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases
>
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases
Thoughts?
--
Sent from my phone
12 matches
Mail list logo
