maven-m2-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <>
Subject Re: <build> section of pom.xml?
Date Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:30:00 GMT
Yes, sorry - I didn't write this up like I'd promised.

Vincent Massol wrote:

>  <build> 
>    <scriptSourceDirectory>src/main/scripts</scriptSourceDirectory> 
>    <resources>
>      <resource>
>        <directory>src/main/scripts</directory>
>        <includes><include>**/*.mmld</include></includes>
>      </resource>
>    </resources>
>  </build>
I don't think the resources are needed here...

>I would have thought that everything in m2 would be plugins and that you
>would need to use the
>  <plugin>
>    <id>xxxx...
>    <configuration>
>notation to configure everything. Thus I would have thought that the <build>
>element would have disappeared altogether.
I originally attempted to push everything through plugins, but it got
complicated with the standard elements that are used across multiple
plugins - which those elements are. The build directory wasn't gone, as
there is global configuration - eg <directory>.

>What if you want to add a new source directory type, say aspects. Are you
>going to change the model and add:
Aspects, I believe, are not inputs across multiple plugins. So they
would come through the aspectj plugin, just like other sources do (eg
modello descriptors).

>What if a new source type appears after m2 is released?
If some other case comes up, what will have to happen is that the
results of one plugin will be fed back through the context and back into
the next plugin using OGNL. We are working on that for alpha-2.

>What about the src/main/webapp? Is there also a <webappSourceDirectory>
>element? If not, why would there be a scriptSourceDirectory or an
>aspectSourceDirectory and not a webappSourceDirectory? (I know the level of
>genericity is different but I'm playing the devil's advocate here)
<warSourceDirectory> is a property on the war plugin.

>I think it feels awkward to give more important to some source types than
>others and it seems unbalanced.
I felt awkward without the build section - but maybe old habits die hard.

>What have I not understood? ;-)
It was just a judgement call - I'm happy with it. Is it really confusing?

- Brett

View raw message