www-builds mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Desruisseaux <martin.desruisse...@geomatys.fr>
Subject Re: volunteering for ASF Jenkins farm service maintenance
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:26:45 GMT
Hello Dennis

Le 14/04/14 02:06, Dennis Lundberg a écrit :
> Yes, as you have already noticed there are some problems when genersting a
> Maven site with Maven 3. Looking for a suitable work-around I'd like to ask
> why you run 'mvn site' ?

The main reason is for generating aggregated javadoc, for allowing us to
check formatting as we introduce new API (especially when we insert
tables, PNG images or MathML). We could use "mvn javadoc:aggregate", but
the later seems to require the maven-javadoc-plugin configuration to be
provided in the <build> section while "mvn site" requires the
configuration to be provided in the <reporting> section of pom.xml
(unless I missed something). We would like to avoid duplicating
configuration. The FAQ [1] gave me a feeling that <reporting> was
preferred, which implies to use "mvn site" (in my attempts "mvn
javadoc:javadoc" ignored the <reporting> configuration).

> If you want reports on the status of yuor code there are other ways. For
> example, if you want torun FindBugs and checkstyle on your code on Jenkins,
> you can use 'mvn verify findbugs:findbugs checkstyle:checkstyle' instead,
> and then use the Jenkins plugins for FindBugs and Checkstyle to render
> reports in Jenkins. This has the added benefit of giving you graphs over
> time for these tools.

FindBugs was indeed a second reason, thanks for the tip. So we could
abandon "mvn site" usage and move all <reporting> configuration to the
<build> section. I will post this suggestion on the SIS list.




View raw message