Hi all,
I do maintain a custom enforcer rule implementation to restrict usage of
unwanted classes in a code base.
>From the enforcer plugin's documentation I learned that such a custom rule
can be used like this:
...
Thus, referring to the custom implementation with its ful
't need JUnit for my tests just because
> SomeAwesomeProject uses JUnit for its tests, and I don't want to ship JUnit
> in my project.
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 2:40 PM Simon Taddiken
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I've encountered the following behavio
Hi everyone,
I've encountered the following behavior and I'm not quite sure whether it
is desirable.
In my project, I have declared a dependency *X* with scope *test*. I then
updated the version of a 3rd party dependency *Y*. In its new version, *Y*
suddenly requires the aforementioned dependency
signing? ie. like in
https://github.com/sonatype/oss-parents/blob/master/forge-parent/pom.xml
On 9 Nov 2014 11:51, "Simon Taddiken" wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to introduce a common parent pom for my projects. So I have
created a maven artifact which only consists of that pom.xml
McCulloch wrote:
Does your pom have a release profile that executes gpg signing? ie. like in
https://github.com/sonatype/oss-parents/blob/master/forge-parent/pom.xml
On 9 Nov 2014 11:51, "Simon Taddiken" wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to introduce a common parent pom for my projects. So I
Hi,
I'm trying to introduce a common parent pom for my projects. So I have
created a maven artifact which only consists of that pom.xml and no
further sources, resources or whatsoever. On a "normal" project, upon
deploying, a "artifactId-version.pom" and corresponding .asc is created
within t
