> 1) I *must* use Maven for work project. And currently we're stuck with > 2.0.8 (we have no in-house Maven experts to help us upgrade to 2.2.x or
Since you're the one posting here, are you not the "in-house expert"? If not, why aren't you asking these questions of your "experts" and then they can ask here if they can't answer themselves? It seems like your in-house experts aren't doing much for you anyway, so why bother paying a lot of attention to the requirement that you stay on 2.0.8 for "in house support"?? There shouldn't be much stopping you from upgrading from 2.0.8 to 2.2 except corporate policies -- technically, it should all work without any (many) issues and would probably be worth it. > 2) I have read a couple books on Maven including the O'Reilly book (which is > pretty decent btw). Maven is so complex that it takes months of hands-on This is your opinion. If you agree with and accept Maven's conventions over configuration approach and have the ability to refactor your software to meet its expectations, then you can have fairly complex software building under Maven in a short period of time. > 4) Maven should be able to accommodate an exploded WAR and EAR without > having to package the WAR and then unexplode it. And I should not have to > use a plugin like jboss-maven-plugin unpack goal to achieve this (which Maven's opinion is different from yours here. > explodes the EAR but not the WAR). I understand that the install lifecycle > phase will ultimately install the EAR into a local Maven repo, but what if I > don't necessarily need that to happen for my local dev builds on my dev box? Maven is opinionated software. It sounds like you disagree with several of its opinions including this one. For dev purposes, perhaps it makes sense to just use Ant? There is no rule that says you can't use both Ant and Maven to build your software. > What exactly is 'war' or 'install' above? Is that referring to a Maven > plugin (e.g. maven-war-plugin and maven-install-plugin)? or a specific goal The naming is groupId:artifactId:goal. The package line means "in the package phase for the war lifecycle, execute the goal war in the plugin o.a.m.p:m-w-p." > (e.g. war:war)? Maybe I can write a custom lifecycle which uses > war:exploded instead... Yes, this seems like a reasonable approach for your specific requirements. I told you to look into simply making a custom lifecycle yesterday. Wayne --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
