maven-m2-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <>
Subject RE: [jira] Work started: (MNG-173) pom changes
Date Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:43:55 GMT

I'm not responding much more to this thread as it seems to be going a little in
circles. There is a basic misunderstanding here, so for the benefit of the whole
list, let me try and clear it up.

Versioning the POM is easier if we only make additions rather than removals
and/or deprecations as it is backwards compatible without any work. The sensible
thing to do then, is to make it a minimal POM. Anything that can go in plugin
configuration should.

That's not to say anything that can be shared shouldn't. It is being shared (eg,
source directory). However, they'll only be introduced to the POM after careful

They must be useful in more than one context though, and the fact that their
value is the same must be a requirement, rather than coincidental. For example,
the JDK requirement of compilation and runtime may be different, so are better
specified separately.

For your specific examples, aspectj will be one plugin, so setting the
configuration on the plugin will apply it to both the compile and javadoc goals. 

For your example of maven.compile.source vs. maven.javadoc.source - it is
obvious that the m2 solution is at least as good as m1 where you must specify it
twice. We can definitely introduce constant definitions in the POM to allow
these to be made identical. And in the future, we may add the source
compatibility version to the POM, but it's risky to throw the kitchen sink into

Does this clear it up?

- Brett

View raw message