maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard Sand" <>
Subject opinions on MJAVADOC-451
Date Mon, 01 Aug 2016 22:33:30 GMT
Hi all,

I'd like to ask for opinions on Robert Scholte and I 
have been discussing this off list and essentially disagree on it.

The request is very simple - to add a "skip" parameter to the 
javadoc:fix goal. In my projects we are using the fix goal unattended, 
i.e. with the parameter "force=true", as part of the regular build 

Most goals (including javadoc) that run in the regular lifecycle have a 
skip option. Robert's position (and forgive me if I misrepresent this at 
all Robert and please weigh in) is that javadoc:fix should not be used 
in the lifecycle and that the goal should in fact have 
requireDirectInvocation=true. He also pointed out to me that I can 
create a profile to enable/disable the goal as an alternative.

My opinion is that, since the goal does not require direct invocation, 
then running within the lifecycle has to be considered acceptable use of 
the goal. And having a skip parameter adds 5 lines of code, is a common 
and normal pattern used by many other plugins/goals, and allows the goal 
to be used in this fashion without introducing even more profiles.

I've submitted patches for this issue and also several other issues in 
the javadoc plugin as I continue to work through getting the goal to 
work well automated. Just pointing out that I'm not just asking for the 
larger community to do stuff to make my life easier - I'm trying to 
contribute as best I can and provide patches for what I uncover.

Best regards,


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message