On 20.10.2011, at 00:21, Ansgar Konermann wrote:
Am 18.10.2011 13:28, schrieb Dirk Olmes:
I am aware of the <pluginManagement> section but fail to see if it
would
help: I'd still have to list all the plugins to be executed in the
individual installer POMs.
True, but IMHO a lot better than specifying the whole plugin
configuration over and over again. This is probably the "low hanging
fruit" which you could harvest easily.
Not low enough for me :-)
The alternative would have been to write a custom generator for pom
files.
Regarding your use case: do you have a) N products which need to be
packaged all in the same way or b) one product which has to be
packaged
in N similar variants? Or where is the variation in your packaging
otherwise? What differs between the projects you're attempting to
package?
It's more like a) - different products, same packaging. These products
are all very similar since they sit on top of the same framework,
though. The packaging process is always like this:
- use an assembly to put all of our classes from different child
modules into one jar that's to be fed into proguard for obfuscation
- generate the obfuscator config, this plugin resolves depencies and
puts paths to third party jars into a template
- use proguard to obfuscate only our classes - third party classes are
open source anyway so there's little use in obfuscating them
- use another assembly to package up all third party jars along with
our obfuscated jar and some supporting resources like scripts etc.
into a deployment zip
- use yet another assembly to package up the deployment zip and an
installer shell script into an installer.zip
All the installers we produce vary only in dependencies and in the
contents of the various assemblies. The list of plugins and their
configurations stays the same.
-dirk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
