[jira] Reopened: (MNG-366) revisit inclusion of reports in the plugin manager

["Brett Porter (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org>]

     [ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-366?page=all ]
     
Brett Porter reopened MNG-366:
------------------------------


reporting api is back in the core

> revisit inclusion of reports in the plugin manager
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>          Key: MNG-366
>          URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-366
>      Project: Maven 2
>         Type: Bug
>   Components: design
>     Versions: 2.0-alpha-2
>     Reporter: Brett Porter
>     Assignee: Brett Porter
>      Fix For: 2.0-alpha-3

>
>
> We've so far included the reports directly into the plugin manager - so reports are plugins. This was done to reduce duplication, and to make it easier to create plugins that do both tasks (Eg clover doing a report, but also a test that fails if under a certain threshold).
> The downsides are:
> - doxia is now loaded into the core
> - this might make it harder to reuse from Ant tasks
> - it is inconsistent with the POM definition, and a report may need to be declared twice unnecessarily.
> We need to revisit whether this was the right choice - and if so, whether separating build from report plugins in the pom is the best idea.
> Doxia being loaded into the core could definitely be avoided by correct plugin classloader handling.
> Original mail before decision:
> Firstly, are report JARs regular plugins, or should they have the type
> "maven-report"? We believe they should be one JAR - ie only a
> maven-plugin type.
> - On the upside, this means that when you have a goal and a report doing
> similar things (eg the clover test that fails if a certain coverage % is
> missed, as well as the generated report), the code is all together and
> there are just a mojo and report class in the JAR.
> - On the downside, you are incurring a maven-plugin-api dependency on
> someone only doing reporting, and a maven-reporting-api dependency on
> someone only doing a plugin when the JAR provides both. I don't believe
> this is a big deal. An alternative is to have the reporting mojo in a
> separate jar that depends on the mojo, overcoming the latter which is
> probably the only real problem. Thoughts?
> Now, currently the report manager is a separate entity, used by the site
> plugin. It resolves the reports on demand, similarly to the plugin
> manager. If a report is a plugin, should the single plugin manager be
> used? I think that it probably should, but we can defer the work on this
> until we are certain.
> Also, I think we need to introduce a pluginManagement section to
> <reports /> so that report plugin configuration can be done in the same
> way as build plugin configuration. Does everyone agree?

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


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