This is another example:
http://htmlunit.sourceforge.net/dependencies.html
the htmlunit dependency report is generated applying an xsl stylesheet
directly to the pom. Dependencies group are generated using a property
tag in each dependency listed in the POM.
Whatever solution will be chosen it sh
AIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Felipe Leme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 10:35 AM
> > To: Maven Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Adding a comment to dependencies
> >
> &g
> -Original Message-
> From: Felipe Leme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 10:35 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Adding a comment to dependencies
>
>
> On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 03:22, Michal Maczka wrote:
> > I don
If the property solution is fine, I could apply the patch...
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 17:41, Brett Porter wrote:
> You can use a property now to get this happening - I have no problem
> with that.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMA
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 03:22, Michal Maczka wrote:
> I don't think that XML comments are sufficient here.
I agree.
> First of all I'd like to see those comments propagated to documenatation
> (website, pdf etc) sometimes they are quite important...
That's right. Take a look in the Display Taglib
actually, just to take an example, the maven plugin pom editor
silently eliminates all xml comments (this made disappear the
xml-comment based implementation of a couple of projects here)
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:22:57 -0800, Michal Maczka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Porter wrote:
>
>
>
>
regardless of the implementation, I think that it is of much more
value to have dependency reason (use case 1) in the site that in the
project as an xml comment.
At my company that was decided, but I think that the project site is
of great value to maven, and since there can be found the sources,
t
Brett Porter wrote:
That said, there will be the ability to make changes for 1.1, so we
should decide whether it is really needed.
You can use a property now to get this happening - I have no problem
with that.
I don't believe a element under a dependency is really
necessary. The use cases I
On 25 Nov 2004 11:34:31 -0500, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 18:36, Felipe Leme wrote:
> > Miguel,
> >
> > Applying such patches are not that easy, as the patch adds a new feature
> > to the dependency which I'm not sure if it's the right one.
>
> Supplying a pat
That said, there will be the ability to make changes for 1.1, so we
should decide whether it is really needed.
You can use a property now to get this happening - I have no problem
with that.
I don't believe a element under a dependency is really
necessary. The use cases I see are:
- describe
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 18:36, Felipe Leme wrote:
> Miguel,
>
> Applying such patches are not that easy, as the patch adds a new feature
> to the dependency which I'm not sure if it's the right one.
Supplying a patch which changes the POM itself is not likely to be
absorbed rapidly. The POM is the
I totally agree that it is a far better aproach to have a child elemnt
of the dependency, however, as you said, this requires more changes
that are not likely to be on 1.0.x. What I implemented is a less
intrusive solution, since properties for dependencies are already
there. Future migration shoul
> -Original Message-
> From: Maczka Michal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 9:24 AM
> To: 'Maven Developers List'
> Subject: RE: Adding a comment to dependencies
>
>
> Try to put thme POM for any of the dependencies which
> -Original Message-
> From: Patrick Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:05 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Adding a comment to dependencies
>
>
> I like this Idea. A related need is commenting what services the
Miguel,
Applying such patches are not that easy, as the patch adds a new feature
to the dependency which I'm not sure if it's the right one.
I mean, I liked your patch, but I would prefer that the comment was a
child element of the dependency, as Michal suggested. But then it would
requires a cha
I like this Idea. A related need is commenting what services the
dependencies provide. What does 'jaxen', 'jdom', etc. provide to the
codebase? it would be good if there was a standard method by which
dependencies could describe themselves. So in addition to the jar,
licenses, and pom informati
Well, the patch is here http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPXDOC-129
I hope some commiter likes it and adds it :)
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:20:09 -0300, Miguel Griffa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yes, certainly it would be usefull to have buildtime and runtime
> separation for dependencies, specially
yes, certainly it would be usefull to have buildtime and runtime
separation for dependencies, specially when adding antlr, xdoclet or
similar. this may be specified with properties like war.bundle and so,
but I think its better to tag a dependency as compile time classpath
or runtimeclasspath, sinc
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 16:15, Miguel Griffa wrote:
> 1. How to I access the dep property from the velocity template
> context? (There seems to be no way to access the properties even from
> Dependency at maven)
I do something similiar in my company, but I don't have the code right
now to tell you
Miguel Griffa wrote:
Hi
At my company we are asking to add a comment to dependencies, this
comment is supossed to aid kowing why is that dep there. I'm trying
add a column to the dependencies report in the xdoc plugin. My
questions are:
1. How to I access the dep property from the velocity temp
20 matches
Mail list logo
