Plugin is used by EAP maven repo build to generate eap-runtime bom eg [1] based on the
feature packs dependency tree.
Relevant configuration is [2]
<
Hi Paul and Petr,
Do you know of any uses of this plugin we could learn from?
Best regards,
Brian
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Kabir Khan <kkhan(a)redhat.com
<mailto:kkhan@redhat.com>> wrote:
Perhaps
https://github.com/jboss/bom-builder-maven-plugin
<
https://github.com/jboss/bom-builder-maven-plugin> can be used?
I've not played with it
> On 4 May 2018, at 22:11, David Lloyd <david.lloyd(a)redhat.com
<mailto:david.lloyd@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> I've created
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-10330
<
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-10330> and
>
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-3803
<
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-3803> to track this.
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Jason Greene <jason.greene(a)redhat.com
<mailto:jason.greene@redhat.com>> wrote:
>> I agree. We can break the bom cycle a different way.
>>
>>> On May 4, 2018, at 3:53 PM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd(a)redhat.com
<mailto:david.lloyd@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I propose we revert the component-matrix change. This change is
>>> ostensibly to help in the creation of a BOM for the client libraries
>>> and other dependent projects; however, the cost has turned out to be
>>> somewhat higher than expected.
>>>
>>> IntelliJ seems to be unable to cope with dependency changes in the
>>> project due to the use of import from the root POM. This means that
>>> the entire project must be force-reimported from time to time to keep
>>> dependencies up to date, and forgetting to do so can lead to
>>> development issues and lost time.
>>>
>>> Also, I've observed that Maven itself does not always correctly
>>> resolve versions anymore, when you're building from a submodule. I
>>> don't really know why this is the case but I suspect that it's
due to
>>> some algorithmic ambiguity when the dependency tree is not linear like
>>> it used to be.
>>>
>>> I think that if we need to generate some BOM for use by external
>>> projects, it should be done as a separate step and artifact which
>>> acquires versions from the parent. I believe we had it this way at
>>> one point, didn't we?
>>>
>>> Anyway I think this change didn't work out, and we should undo it
>>> while it's still remotely possible. WDYT?
>>>
>>> --
>>> - DML
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev>
>
>
>
> --
> - DML
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev>
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev>
--
Brian Stansberry
Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat