I've re-read the MECLIPSE-37 discussion and thought a bit about the bigger picture:
Maybe the root of the problem is that plug-ins like eclipse are logically outside Maven's scope. Arguably, Maven as a project lifecycle management tool should not be concerned with how developers view and modify project source artifacts. A POM is an expression of project policy. Should that policy dictate how editing tools are used? A practical example of the problem of coupling these concerns would arise when two developers wish to use the same IDE but with different configurations. Putting any such configuration information into a POM makes a policy statement about how that particular IDE is used. But IDE configuration should be developer-specific, not project-specific. In the example, each developer would have to maintain her own POM or one of the developers would have to defer to the other developer's ways. Maybe the whole issue should be viewed from the other direction. That is, the artifact view/modify tools should use Maven as a service rather than having Maven try to incorporate, via plug-ins, v/m tool configuration into the project lifecycle. -dub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
