Hi John,
I've been away for a while and see that a lot of activity has been going on in the meantime!
Since I am just an m2 newbee, I cannot oversee if the issues arround <plugins> and <pluginManagement> sections have been resolved now. So I filed the <pluginManagement> issue anyway (http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-362). Please ignore it if it has already been fixed now.
I will try to build the latest from SVN and perform some tests with my own projects.
Thanks for all the good work. Peter van de Hoef
John Casey wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I'm looking at:
- - org.apache.maven.project.inheritance.DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler - - org.apache.maven.project.injection.DefaultModelDefaultsInjector
and here's what I see:
- - Combination of inherited <pluginManagement/> sections (both parent and child have <pluginManagement/> stuff defined): - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie.
NOTE: There was a problem with the <configuration/> of a plugin not being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's not going to be in alpha-1 obviously... :)
- - Combination of local POM's <plugins/> with [inherited] <pluginManagement/> section: - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOW IT WORKS: <configuration/> elements (both on <goal/> and on <plugin/>) are combined, with ties going to the local configuration (if the elements collide, the local specification wins). The list of goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to collisions of goals. That is, if the <pluginManagement/> section specifies some goals and their configuration for a given plugin, and the <plugin/> section specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the <pluginManagement/> section are merged into the one from the plugin specification itself.
NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a Good Thing(tm). For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in <pluginManagement/> but allow other goals from that plugin to run? How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly?
HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any <configuration/> or <goals/> element specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the usage of the corresponding element in the <pluginManagement/> section for that plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides without having to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are wrong for the local case but which are not overridden in the local POM. It also makes the override mechanism more consistent with <dependencyManagement/>.
These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes.
Hope this clears things up somewhat. :)
Cheers,
- -john
J. Matthew Pryor wrote:
From the docs herehttp://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Build about the <pluginManagement/> element
Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the plugin's entire
definition here.
So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to reference the plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent <pluginManagement/>, how do I do that without overriding the plugin's entire definition?
Also am I understanding correctly that <build><plugins/> setting are never inherited?
BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the user docs. Definitely need this clarification
jmp
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance
Hi John,
Thanks for your help. So <pluginManagement> is used for specifying plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether they are used or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The <plugins> section is just a list of plugins that will actually be used. This list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a setting of build-section has to be changed.
Now, I have specified a <pluginManagement> section in the parent POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived projects, but it does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts complaining about assertions again.
The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by inserting a copy of the <pluginManagement> section of the parent into the child.
If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance() function correctly takes care of <pluginManagement> sections of the parent.
What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the project defs?
The parent POM looks like:
<project>
<name>Parent POM</name>
<groupId>_test</groupId> <artifactId>parent</artifactId> <version>1.0</version> <packaging>pom</packaging> <modules> <module>child</module> </modules>
<build> <sourceDirectory>src</sourceDirectory>
<pluginManagement> <plugins> <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT</version> <configuration> <source>1.5</source> <target>1.5</target> </configuration> </plugin> </plugins> </pluginManagement>
<plugins> <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId> </plugin> </plugins> </build>
</project>
And the child, which inherits from the parent:
The <build> section is overridden with a different <sourceDirectory> and, since the <plugins> of the parent gets lost, it is repeated.
<project>
<name>Child POM</name>
<groupId>_test</groupId> <artifactId>child</artifactId> <version>1.0</version> <packaging>pom</packaging>
<parent> <groupId>_test</groupId> <artifactId>parent</artifactId> <version>1.0</version> </parent> <build> <sourceDirectory>src2</sourceDirectory> <plugins> <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId> </plugin> </plugins> </build> </project>
Thanks in advance, Peter van de Hoef
John Casey wrote:
Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding
this... :)
Actually, our original decision was to disallow inheritance of any plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually will) modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light
of this,
inherited plugin configuration could lead to somewhat counter-intuitive build behavior.
We have a <pluginManagement/> section of the POM for common configuration of plugins for use within a typical
multiproject-style
setup. It would be used like this:
parent-pom.xml ------------------- ... <pluginManagement> <plugins> <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId> <artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.4</version> <configuration> <someParam>someValue</someParam> </configuration> </plugin> </plugins> </pluginManagement> ... -------------------
child-pom.xml
-------------------
...
<parent>
<groupId>test</groupId> <!-- Pretend that all of
<artifactId>test-root</artifactId> | this resolves to the
<version>1.0</version> | parent-pom.xml above -->
</parent>
...
<build>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId>
<!-- groupId,
<artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId> |
artifactId
</plugin> |
enough here.
--> </build> ... -------------------
If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement section, just specify it locally; more local specification in an inheritance hierarchy wins.
Will this solve your problem?
HTH,
john
Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
Now I see why the complete <build> section is inherited when it is absent in the child:
*if* ( childBuild == *null* ) { child.setBuild( parentBuild ); } *else* { /// A lot of fields are inherited, except <plugins> / }
I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since
Maven does
not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their inheritance rules.
Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete <plugins>
section if
it is not specified in the child, just like you do with <resources> and <testResources>?
That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where there is no <build> section at all. In that way it is possible to 'tweak' the build settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
- Peter
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question about which elements of the POM are
inherited by
derived POM's.
The law on inheritance resides here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven- project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/
DefaultMod
elInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217&sortdir=down&view=log
In my parent POM I have a <build> section which specifies
the source
directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
<build> <sourceDirectory>src</sourceDirectory> <plugins> <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT</version> <configuration> <source>1.5</source> <target>1.5</target> </configuration> </plugin> </plugins> </build>
In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new <build> section is specified:
<build> <sourceDirectory>module/src</sourceDirectory> </build>
The overridden source directory is effectuated in this
second POM,
but it appears that the java compiler settings have
disappeared (it
starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like
assertions). If
I do not specify a <build> section in the derived POM,
the settings
of the base POM are inherited.
It appears that the <build> section is (completely)
inherited if it
is not present in the derived POM, but if a <build> section is specified in the derived POM, everything from the base
POM is thrown
away and only the settings of the derived POM are used. Is this correct?
We selectively choose what to inherit and the
configuration for the
plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form
configurations
essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the
configurations
but this might not work generally so if we need to allow
the plugin
to determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll probably have to come up with some way to decide this
using notations
we have for plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue
so we'll
take a look at it.
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCb8uDK3h2CZwO/4URApCnAKCOW/guaN62L3k3KWfu3st8Ncdy5gCfcEg+ TGw7IfEJNhXiUzin23vEPyA= =VfpF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
