A simple XSLT stylesheet would do the job there. You don't need maven to support this format.
On 12/17/05, Thomas Van de Velde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -1 > > I agree with Brett. This is a matter of taste. My taste goes towards the > existing solution. Writing everything on a single line may even become less > readable. Have you ever tried to read an Eclipse .classpath file? You can > hardly say that's more readeable. I also think that mixing attributes with > elements is in this case a bad idea and would hurt overall consistency. > > On 12/17/05, Srepfler Srgjan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >If your sole concern is the number of lines one must type, it is > > >certainly an option to have meta-pom.xml be in the format you find most > > >comfortable, then xslt it into the "more verbose" m2 pom.xml. > > > > > >This argument of attributes versus elements has existed since the dawn > > >of [xml] time. I am not trying to argue one way or the other, but since > > >m1 pom used the "more verbose" syntax, it eases the transition. > > > > > > My USD$0.02, > > > -- /v\atthew > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > In fact people should develop a plugin that maps the simplified and > > verbose schemas on the fly :) > > The advantage of using namespaces is that you can create a your tag and > > map it to the verbose tag from the official pom. > > That's the way I've seen the spring guys use it for now but the > > advantage that I see is that in could be much easier to extend the pom > > and it would be more "type safe" > > > > My 0.02MKD > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- Alexandre Poitras Québec, Canada --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
