Mailing-List: contact users-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Maven Users List" <users@maven.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of eric.kolotyluk@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.213.43 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4F61E0AE.3050301@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 05:29:34 -0700
From: Eric Kolotyluk <eric.kolotyluk@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: Which is the BEST Approach to define Global POM.XML
References: 
 <CAMsWnVafAngUTXcCx3eA3UxqqMOogR8O3b_ROwM+XTim5A6uhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F610C13.2070108@gmail.com> <jjsgls$4qh$1@dough.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <jjsgls$4qh$1@dough.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 2012-03-15 3:35 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Eric Kolotyluk wrote:
>
>> What I do is have a top-level POM like (see below), and then I have my
>> top level project POMs reference that (see further below). This may not
>> be the best example, as I am still in the process of building the
>> infrastructure, but
>>
>>   1. I put the Parent POM in its own place in source control and I
>>      manually deploy it with Maven when I make changes.
>>   2. You need to do this before creating any Project POMs that reference
>>      it because they should reference it via Maven and not the file
>>      system - if you work in a large company you will soon discover why.
>>   3. There is of course a bootstrapping issue because now the project
>>      POMs need to know how to find your Repository Manager, which is why
>>      I include that information in the top level (Corporate) POM so
>>      people can use it as a reference.
>>   4. As you may gather I am using Sonatype's Nexus as a Repository Manager.
>>   5. We are still developing our corporate repository infrastructure so
>>      the content of the Corporate POM will evolve over time as our
>>      corporate governance and policies are better codified.
>>
>> Does that help?
> [snip]
>
>> <modules>
>> <module>platform.Java</module>
>> <module>platform.NET</module>
>> </modules>
> [snip]
>
> It's a bad idea to declare modules in a global (resp. corporate POM). Such a
> POM should be a project on its own with no submodules. Or do you think the
> Apache parent POM references all projects at Apache that use Maven directly
> (or indirectly)?

FYI - those modules were not declared in the top level Corporate POM, 
they were declare in the Project  POM. The example Corporate POM had no 
modules. In the original response I gave the Corporate and Project POMs 
were separated by a - - - - - - - - - - line. While Jörg makes a good 
point, the point did not pertain to my examples.

>
> A project POM may now refer the global parent either using a specific
> version (to pin down a specific set of versions and dependencies) or a
> SNAPSHOT to use the latest entries/updates of the global POM.
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org