THIS IS A TEST INSTANCE. ALL YOUR CHANGES WILL BE LOST!!!!
...
For reports, it would be as follows:
Code Block | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
<report><plugin> <g/a/v> <configuration /> <reportSets> <reportSet> <id /> <configuration /> <reports> <report>...</report> <report>...</report> </reports> </reportSet> </reportSets> </report>plugin> |
...
Problem Statement
There appear to be some use cases for running the same goal twice. The current proposal is for this to be configured in the POM like so:
Code Block | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
<plugin> <groupId>org.codehaus.modello</groupId> <artifactId>modello-maven-plugin</artifactId> <configuration> <model>maven.mdo</model> </configuration> <goals> <goal> <id>xpp3-reader</id> <configuration> <version>3.0.0</version> </configuration> </goal> <goal> <id>xpp3-reader</id> <configuration> <version>4.0.0</version> </configuration> </goal> <goal> <id>xpp3-writer</id> <configuration> <version>3.0.0</version> </configuration> </goal> <goal> <id>xpp3-writer</id> <configuration> <version>4.0.0</version> </configuration> </goal> . . . |
This has some problems:
- it is very verbose and tedious
- the inheritence behaviour of merge can no longer be relied upon - do goal definitions merge together, or as new goal instances?
- has a similar affect on profiles that might want to call a goal again.
Potential solutions
Always Merge - make the mojo take multiple configurations
...
The downside of this apporach is that:
- it becomes complicated to specify different configurations in goals
- it may be desired to have different goals per configuration