maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian E. Fox" <>
Subject RE: Comments / Ideas for MNG-3244
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:29:00 GMT

>The docs at [0] got updated to say the artifact id will always be
>regardless of a trailing slash or not. Are there any other docs handing
>around from which people might be fooled?

Probably not, but we changed the docs because of this issue.

>Also note that this unconditional appending of the artifact id seems to
>in sync with the handling of ${project.url}. Any changes to the
>should be applied to both of these URLs as they are usually related to

Yes, this applies to all urls

>> My only thought is to use some other identifier at the end of the url
>> indicate NOT to prepend the artifact and to strip the indicator.

>I voted on this issue by myself but I believe such an approach would be
>ugly hack. You require people to mess up their URLs. Furthermore, this
>approach would be a rather obscure/proprietary URL handling. If
>is on your charter, this seems like the wrong way since people would
need to
>read the small print before understanding this Maven speciality. The
>element is called *url, so people will expect it to take a URL, nothing


I agree it's not the greatest. But I see it quite often being an issue
in practice and the users talk about it a lot. The benefit to this
approach is it leaves alone the urls for people who want/expect the
current behavior. Only those looking to work around it would need to use
this (and seek out the answer)

>Another question: How would the special don't-append-marker behave in
>context of multiple parent POMs? I'm not fully familar with the project
>builder but wouldn't the following sequence apply:
>- grandfather POM defines "url/##"
>- parent POM inherits "url/##" and fixes it to "url/"
>- child POM inherits "url/" and fixes it to "url/artifact-id"
>Would that be intended/intuitive?

So normally you would get: url/parent/child. Here you should get
/url/artifact-id because it was declared in the child. If you omitted
the url in the child you would get /url/ (people do this because url
contains a property already )

>> Naturally in 2.1 we need to fix this in a better way

>I might be missing a point but is there *really* need to fix the issue
>2.0.x without some helping POM addition? I mean, users (including me)
>simply specify the proper/desired URLs in each and every POM and the
>deployment is fine. Sure, this might not a convenient approach but
>convenience raises no urgency for not-so-lovely approaches, IMHO.

It's not a sense of urgency really, it's that if we decide not to fix it
in 2.0.x, it probably means close to a year before 2.1 could be in full
production in most places.

It doesn't affect me, but I am trying to come to a conclusion now rather
than kick this forward another release.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message