Hi Stephen & everyone,
As always, thanks for your comments and blog posts! I really appreciate all
the time you pour into this community.
> People having to use ${basedir}/../.. and feeling uneasy about it...
> to my mind that is the perfect balance. It's quick... it's dirty...
> you know it's a
http://developer-blog.cloudbees.com/2013/04/the-maven-way.html
On 16 April 2013 16:16, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
>
>
> On 16 April 2013 16:11, Mark H. Wood wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 09:48:35PM +0100, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > The reality is that the true goal of the Maven
On 16 April 2013 16:11, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 09:48:35PM +0100, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> [snip]
> > The reality is that the true goal of the Maven Way™ is that your pom
> should
> > be as close as possible to the following
> >
> >
> > ...
> > ...
> > ...
> > ...
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 09:48:35PM +0100, Stephen Connolly wrote:
[snip]
> The reality is that the true goal of the Maven Way™ is that your pom should
> be as close as possible to the following
>
>
> ...
> ...
> ...
> ...
>
> ...
>
>
>
> Every line you add to the above is movi
On 15 April 2013 20:42, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> A case in point of the improving (though not related to the idea of being
>> able to get a property exposing the root (never mind the which root:
>> reactor/inheritence/**inheritence within reactor) but more related to
>> re-engineering to make
Hi,
based on the requirement which has been made to introduce a new property
for the root of the reactor I 100% agree with Stephens argumentation.
I have taken a look into those question on SO and all of those things
can be solved in better ways than suggested on SO, cause many people
didn't
CC'ing users@maven because I think my point applies to the entire Maven
community:
Well my view is that such practice is bad practice, there are good ways to
do things and bad ways to do things. Hard-coding references between
projects using the file system is bad practice. For one thing it fails t