directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Seelmann <>
Subject Re: Maven 3 and site generation
Date Thu, 27 Jan 2011 10:32:23 GMT
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Felix Knecht <> wrote:
>>>>> I don't know if M3 site plugins configuration is
>>>>> inheritable/expandable to
>>>>> add additional reports for specific modules/projects. That's why I
>>>>> wonder if
>>>>> it wouldn't make more sense defining the site plugins configuration
>>>>> rather
>>>>> in each projects pom.xml (studio/shared/apacheds/...) than in the
>>>>> directory/project/pom.xml?
>>>> Good point.
>>>> It was a weakness of the M2 reporting configuration that it wasn't
>>>> inheritable. I hope(d) that would be fixed in M3, but we can just test
>>>> it.
>>> Up to now I wasn't successfull. All I got was an error like
>>> "failed to get Reports: Could not find goal 'cim' in plugin" ...
>> This help a bit. Let's do some
>> more testing ...
> IMO it's less complicated and less painfull when dropping the
> maven-site-plugin configuration from the project/pom.xml (parent) and fully
> configure it in each subproject's own pom.xml (studio/shared/apacheds/...).
> Using workarounds (like MSITE-484) will not really make things more stable
> and understandable. The KISS principle will make it also easier to
> understand the plugin configuration.

Wow, I got it now: The configurations are merged in the order as
defined, there is no match by groupId/artifactId.

So if the parent POM defines configurations for reporting plugins A,
B, and C. And the child POM defines reporting plugins X, Y, and Z.
Then the configuration of A is merged into X, B's configuration is
merged into Y, etc. That makes no sense at all.

I'll remove the site plugin from the 'project' POM.

Kind Regards,

View raw message