On 2 August 2013 06:51, Stephen Connolly
<stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 2 August 2013, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>> I'm trying to argue that that your perception of it being bad practice
>> is out of place. It is very common for teams to want to have a tree of
>> modules that are all versioned together with a single version number.
>
> Then they all should have a common parent and use parent version
> inheritance.
They do. But its never that simple. Some of the child modules are
public and some are private (of the same public parent). Since the
names of the private ones cannot be exposed in the public area, we
have a separate private aggregator to pull the private and public into
the same reactor where everything works fine.
I have tested the changes, and they replicate the set-aggregated goal
I wrote. I still think a separate goal is clearer to document and use,
but its your plugin. I think you're going to need quite a lot of
documentation to describe what the plugin is supposed to do. For
example, for my use case, only the artifactId needs to be wildcarded.
There is one area where the plugin does not update (nor did set-aggregated):
<dependency>
<groupId>com.opengamma.platform</groupId>
<artifactId>og-integration</artifactId>
<version>${og.version}</version>
</dependency>
Because it is a property, it is not updated. I think this is a separate issue.
Thanks for working on this. Once released it will work effectively
enough for us, with just the one manual ${og.version} property change.
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
