Re: [jdf-dev] Quickstarts review

Rafael, I actually lobbied for this because it makes maintenance easier if you only have to make updates in the root pom in one place. However, Pete is right, as always. :-) On 01/28/2013 11:39 AM, Pete Muir wrote: > We want to make it easy to copy a quickstart into a developer's own > project. POM inheritance breaks this :-( > > On 28 Jan 2013, at 16:40, Rafael Benevides wrote: > >> Talking about inheritance, in that case, Quickstarts shouldn't avoid to >> have it's own properties and use only those on root pom ? >> >> Em 28-01-2013 14:33, Pete Muir escreveu: >>> Yeah. it may be the POM is the right place, it can just get >>> confusing, as people want to inherit from it. >>> >>> On 25 Jan 2013, at 18:21, Sande Gilda wrote: >>> >>>> James, that was very helpful. We need a place to store the >>>> versions and >>>> use for reference. >>>> >>>> On 01/25/2013 12:49 PM, James Perkins wrote: >>>>> This is initially why I added the properties to the parent pom. They >>>>> were added there so you could look at one place for consistence >>>>> of the >>>>> property naming and version alignment. >>>>> >>>>> On 01/25/2013 04:48 AM, Sande Gilda wrote: >>>>>> For now, I use that information when reviewing new quickstart >>>>>> submissions to verify they are using the correct versions. If that >>>>>> disappears, I'll have to search through the other quickstart pom >>>>>> files >>>>>> to find one that uses a particular artifact to know what the latest >>>>>> version is. >>>>>> >>>>>> So until that information is somewhere easy to find, please >>>>>> don't remove >>>>>> it! :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> On 01/25/2013 02:29 AM, Pete Muir wrote: >>>>>>> It does, but lets sort out the tool first! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 24 Jan 2013, at 23:40, Rafael Benevides wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was looking at Quickstarts root pom.xml and realized that >>>>>>>> there are >>>>>>>> several Maven properties that I think that should be only on each >>>>>>>> project's pom.xml. Is that right ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If so, I believe that we should remove this properties and >>>>>>>> leave to the >>>>>>>> script/tooling that we're planning, the responsibility of >>>>>>>> managing this >>>>>>>> properties, specially BOMs and plugins versions besides other >>>>>>>> verifications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So I basically want to know if that makes sense, so I can open >>>>>>>> a pull >>>>>>>> request with this properties removed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer >>>>>>>> Red Hat Brazil >>>>>>>> +55-61-9269-6576 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community >>>>>>>> collaboration. >>>>>>>> See how it works at redhat.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jdf-dev mailing list >>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jdf-dev mailing list >>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> jdf-dev mailing list >> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev > > _______________________________________________ > jdf-dev mailing list > jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev