You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> on 2020/05/25 15:42:41 UTC
Re: Dynamic phases proposal
Stephen,
do we have news about this great feature ?
Enrico
Il giorno sab 23 nov 2019 alle ore 11:51 Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Ok I figured out dynamic lookup from plexus:
>
> $ mvn -version
> Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe;
> 2018-06-17T19:33:14+01:00)
> Maven home: /usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec
> Java version: 1.8.0_152, vendor: Oracle Corporation, runtime:
> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_152.jdk/Contents/Home/jre
> Default locale: en_IE, platform encoding: UTF-8
> OS name: "mac os x", version: "10.14.6", arch: "x86_64", family: "mac"
> $ mvn validate
> [ERROR] The project uses experimental features that require exactly Maven
> 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT -> [Help 1]
> [ERROR]
> [ERROR] To see the full stack trace of the errors, re-run Maven with the -e
> switch.
> [ERROR] Re-run Maven using the -X switch to enable full debug logging.
> [ERROR]
> [ERROR] For more information about the errors and possible solutions,
> please read the following articles:
> [ERROR] [Help 1]
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/MavenExecutionException
>
> Much nicer!
>
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 16:12, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have advanced the PoC a bit more by adding an experiments mechanism.
> >
> > To use the dynamic phases PoC you now need to:
> >
> > 1. Build and install Maven on the branch
> > 2. Add the experiments extension in .mvn/extensions.xml, e.g.
> >
> > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> > <extensions xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/EXTENSIONS/1.0.0" xmlns:xsi="
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> > xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/EXTENSIONS/1.0.0
> > http://maven.apache.org/xsd/core-extensions-1.0.0.xsd">
> >
> > <extension>
> > <groupId>org.apache.maven</groupId>
> > <artifactId>maven-experiments</artifactId>
> > <version>3.7.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > </extension>
> >
> > </extensions>
> >
> > 3. Update your pom to use the new dynamic phases.
> >
> > The reason for the experiments extension is to guard against assuming the
> > phases will work and prevent "normal" versions of Maven from producing a
> > bad build.
> >
> > Here's a build with the extension enabled:
> >
> > [INFO] Enabling experimental features of Maven 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [INFO] Experimental features enabled:
> > [INFO] * dynamic-phases
> > [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Build Order:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] bar
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] test
> > [pom]
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --------------------------< localdomain:foo
> > >---------------------------
> > [INFO] Building foo 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [1/3]
> > [INFO] --------------------------------[ jar
> > ]---------------------------------
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:resources (default-resources) @ foo
> > ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/main/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:compile (default-compile) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:testResources
> > (default-testResources) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/test/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:testCompile (default-testCompile) @
> > foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.12.4:test (default-test) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No tests to run.
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (default-jar) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] JAR will be empty - no content was marked for inclusion!
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (2) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] beat you
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (1) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] hi
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (4) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (3) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] bye
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Summary for test 1.0-SNAPSHOT:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo ................................................ FAILURE [
> > 2.745 s]
> > [INFO] bar ................................................ SKIPPED
> > [INFO] test ............................................... SKIPPED
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 2.813 s
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2019-11-22T15:43:59Z
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Here's the same project with the extensions disabled
> >
> > [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Build Order:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] bar
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] test
> > [pom]
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --------------------------< localdomain:foo
> > >---------------------------
> > [INFO] Building foo 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [1/3]
> > [INFO] --------------------------------[ jar
> > ]---------------------------------
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:resources (default-resources) @ foo
> > ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/main/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:compile (default-compile) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:testResources
> > (default-testResources) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/test/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:testCompile (default-testCompile) @
> > foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.12.4:test (default-test) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No tests to run.
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (default-jar) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] JAR will be empty - no content was marked for inclusion!
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (4) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Summary for test 1.0-SNAPSHOT:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo ................................................ FAILURE [
> > 0.745 s]
> > [INFO] bar ................................................ SKIPPED
> > [INFO] test ............................................... SKIPPED
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 1.054 s
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2019-11-22T15:43:38Z
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Notice how the dynamic phases are completely ignored if the experiment is
> > not activated
> >
> > And here's the foo pom.xml to show what the executions are
> >
> > <project>
> > <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
> > <groupId>localdomain</groupId>
> > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > <version>1.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > <build>
> > <plugins>
> > <plugin>
> > <artifactId>maven-antrun-plugin</artifactId>
> > <executions>
> > <execution>
> > <id>1</id>
> > <phase>before:integration-test</phase>
> > <goals>
> > <goal>run</goal>
> > </goals>
> > <configuration>
> > <tasks>
> > <echo message="hi"/>
> > </tasks>
> > </configuration>
> > </execution>
> > <execution>
> > <id>2</id>
> > <phase>before:integration-test[1000]</phase>
> > <goals>
> > <goal>run</goal>
> > </goals>
> > <configuration>
> > <tasks>
> > <sleep seconds="2"/>
> > <echo message="beat you"/>
> > </tasks>
> > </configuration>
> > </execution>
> > <execution>
> > <id>3</id>
> > <phase>after:integration-test</phase>
> > <goals>
> > <goal>run</goal>
> > </goals>
> > <configuration>
> > <tasks>
> > <echo message="bye"/>
> > </tasks>
> > </configuration>
> > </execution>
> > <execution>
> > <id>4</id>
> > <phase>integration-test</phase>
> > <goals>
> > <goal>run</goal>
> > </goals>
> > <configuration>
> > <tasks>
> > <fail/>
> > </tasks>
> > </configuration>
> > </execution>
> > </executions>
> > </plugin>
> > </plugins>
> > </build>
> > </project>
> >
> > Finally this is what you get if you have the experiment extension added
> > but try to build with an older version of Maven:
> >
> > [WARNING] Error injecting:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.check.MavenExperimentEnabler
> > java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > org/apache/maven/feature/api/MavenFeatureContext
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0 (Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2020)
> > at com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf
> > (InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create
> > (ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive
> > (InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.space.AbstractDeferredClass.get
> > (AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision
> > (BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get
> > (ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get
> > (SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue
> > (LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue
> > (LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next
> > (EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll (AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants
> > (DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute (DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute (MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain (MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main (MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0 (Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke (Method.java:498)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced
> > (Launcher.java:289)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch
> > (Launcher.java:229)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode
> > (Launcher.java:415)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main
> > (Launcher.java:356)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.api.MavenFeatureContext
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.strategy.SelfFirstStrategy.loadClass
> > (SelfFirstStrategy.java:50)
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.unsynchronizedLoadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:271)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:247)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:239)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0 (Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2020)
> > at com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf
> > (InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create
> > (ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive
> > (InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.space.AbstractDeferredClass.get
> > (AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision
> > (BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get
> > (ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get
> > (SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue
> > (LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue
> > (LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next
> > (EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll (AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants
> > (DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute (DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute (MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain (MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main (MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0 (Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke (Method.java:498)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced
> > (Launcher.java:289)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch
> > (Launcher.java:229)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode
> > (Launcher.java:415)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main
> > (Launcher.java:356)
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > constituent[0]: file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/conf/logging/
> > constituent[1]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-repository-metadata-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[2]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-transport-wagon-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[3]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/aopalliance-1.0.jar
> > constituent[4]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-provider-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[5]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-utils-3.1.0.jar
> > constituent[6]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-interpolation-1.24.jar
> > constituent[7]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-artifact-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[8]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-cipher-1.7.jar
> > constituent[9]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/guava-20.0.jar
> > constituent[10]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-slf4j-provider-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[11]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/slf4j-api-1.7.25.jar
> > constituent[12]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/cdi-api-1.0.jar
> > constituent[13]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jcl-over-slf4j-1.7.25.jar
> > constituent[14]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-spi-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[15]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-compat-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[16]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-plugin-api-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[17]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-sec-dispatcher-1.4.jar
> > constituent[18]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-util-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[19]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-component-annotations-1.7.1.jar
> > constituent[20]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-settings-builder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[21]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-cli-1.4.jar
> > constituent[22]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-io-2.5.jar
> > constituent[23]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jansi-1.17.1.jar
> > constituent[24]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-core-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[25]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-impl-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[26]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/guice-4.2.0-no_aop.jar
> > constituent[27]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/org.eclipse.sisu.inject-0.3.3.jar
> > constituent[28]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-file-3.1.0.jar
> > constituent[29]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-builder-support-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[30]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-model-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[31]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-settings-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[32]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-http-3.1.0-shaded.jar
> > constituent[33]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-api-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[34]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-connector-basic-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[35]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-shared-utils-3.2.1.jar
> > constituent[36]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/org.eclipse.sisu.plexus-0.3.3.jar
> > constituent[37]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-model-builder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[38]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/javax.inject-1.jar
> > constituent[39]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-embedder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[40]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jsr250-api-1.0.jar
> > constituent[41]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-lang3-3.5.jar
> > constituent[42]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-provider-api-3.1.0.jar
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > org/apache/maven/feature/api/MavenFeatureContext
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0(Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors(Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors(Class.java:2020)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf(InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create(ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding(InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding(InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive(InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding(InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow(InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow(InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider(InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider(InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance(InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at
> > org.eclipse.sisu.space
> .AbstractDeferredClass.get(AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision(ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision(InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call(ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at
> >
> org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision(BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet(ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get(InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get(ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get(SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get(InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get(InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue(LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at
> org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue(LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at
> >
> org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next(EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll(AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants(DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute(DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute(MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain(MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main(MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> > at
> >
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at
> >
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced(Launcher.java:289)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch(Launcher.java:229)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode(Launcher.java:415)
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main(Launcher.java:356)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.api.MavenFeatureContext
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.strategy.SelfFirstStrategy.loadClass(SelfFirstStrategy.java:50)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.unsynchronizedLoadClass(ClassRealm.java:271)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass(ClassRealm.java:247)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass(ClassRealm.java:239)
> > ... 47 more
> >
> > I'd like to make the error message nicer, but I'll need to dig further
> > into Sisu. In any case it has the desired effect of preventing building a
> > project that uses the experiment with a version of Maven that does not
> > support the experimental features.
> >
> > The main point of experiments is to provide a way for people to try out a
> > feature *that requires adapting your project to use that feature* in a
> safe
> > way that prevents users from accidentally building with a different
> version
> > of Maven. My goal would be to maybe release a
> > 3.7.0-alpha-rfc-dynamic-phases-1 build of Maven with this experiment
> turned
> > on to gather wider feedback. Anyone using the feature would then be fully
> > aware that the experiment may end up different when we actually decide
> what
> > we want to do, but can then easily try it out without a big song and
> dance.
> >
> > NOTE: the pom rewriting that Robert has scheduled for 3.7.0 is IMHO not
> > appropriate for this kind of experiment as it doesn't affect the actual
> > build behaviour. If we have implemented pom rewriting correctly, users
> > should not notice and shouldn't need to update their pom. Dynamic phases
> > does require the pom to be updated, hence why it needs a more
> heavy-handed
> > enforcement through extensions (also the enforcer plugin wouldn't
> guarantee
> > execution on all lifecycles, so if you did something in after:clean
> > enforcer wouldn't have run)
> >
> > -Stephen
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 21:16, Stephen Connolly <
> > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri 15 Nov 2019 at 15:18, Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have to admit that when trying to figure out from a Maven perspective
> >>> it felt like post-X should be called with pre-X too, but that opinion
> has
> >>> changed.
> >>> Why would anybody call pre-X? I'd say to bring the system ready to do
> >>> custom X stuff, so it should stop here executing any other phases.
> >>> However, when pre-X fails, I can imagine that post-X should be called
> >>> too, as Maven wasn't able to bring the system in the right state.
> >>>
> >>> The problem lies in that Maven restarts the lifecycle. If only we could
> >>> do something like
> >>> - run up until pre-X (pause the lifecycle execution)
> >>> - do your custom stuff
> >>> - finish with the post-X
> >>>
> >>> Thinking about some kind of pause... This way at least we won't break
> >>> the lifecycle and leave it clean.
> >>>
> >>
> >> That’s easy. Have a Maven-pause-plugin that just waits for you to press
> >> enter. Bind it to integration-test in a profile and presto!
> >>
> >> But that removes the need for the current explicit phases of pre- and
> >> post-
> >>
> >> TBH I think we need to lay down the plan that we want to go towards. It
> >> will take a while to change existing phases, in part because removing
> >> phases is a breaking change. You can have 3rd part plugins that bind
> >> executions to multiple phases, expecting those phases to both exist and
> >> have specific execution behaviour.
> >>
> >> Hence why I think we should go all the way technically, but leave the
> >> lifecycle mostly as-is (modulo adding any new phases and flagging
> existing
> >> phases as deprecated).
> >>
> >> Half measures will only prolong to pain for users.
> >>
> >> If instead we say: “here’s where we were, here’s where we’re going and
> >> this is how we get there” people can incorporate that and adapt
> >>
> >> Messing about with one phase, that’s just hacks. Adding the ability to
> >> define phase execution guarantees... that’s where we want to go. Adding
> the
> >> ability to control plugin execution order within phases... that’s where
> we
> >> want to go... is the syntax where we want to go? Probably not, but it’s
> how
> >> we can get there
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 15-11-2019 11:07:23, Stephen Connolly <
> >>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri 15 Nov 2019 at 09:18, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On 13-11-2019 21:46:04, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > On Wed 13 Nov 2019 at 19:29, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > The name of the branch contains MNG-5668, but it contains much
> more.
> >>> > > I'd likely lead to comments like "great", without being explicit
> >>> saying
> >>> > > which part(s).
> >>> > > I am aware there's all proposals touch the same code, but can be
> >>> released
> >>> > > isolated from each other.
> >>> > > e.g. if the enums-value are changed to "pre-" and "post-" it should
> >>> work
> >>> > > for the existing phases, which means we could already use it quite
> >>> soon
> >>> > > (still need to test it myself, though)
> >>> > > I also want to provide a counter proposal, but that takes time and
> >>> for me
> >>> > > there are other issues more important.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > How would you handle the use case that we’ve already had reported:
> >>> >
> >>> > As a user I want to test my integration tests in my IDE by running
> `mvn
> >>> > integration-test` so that the test environment is not torn down and I
> >>> can
> >>> > debug and rerun the tests until I’m ready
> >>> >
> >>> > Robert Scholte:
> >>> > I'd say if they want to set up there environment for the integration
> >>> > tests, they'd be running pre-integration-test.
> >>> > Next select in the IDE the test to execute. I don't see an issue
> here.
> >>> > Calling pre-integration-test implies NOT running
> post-integration-test.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I disagree. I think if you run the pre- phase then you should have the
> >>> post- also run
> >>>
> >>> I think we could have a differential failure mode in the pre-phases
> >>> though.
> >>> Iow a pre- phase failure returns a different exit code than the actual
> >>> phase itself
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Every time I explain people about how Maven works with phases, they
> are
> >>> > amazed it doesn't run the post-phase. I doubt we'll see issues if we
> >>> switch
> >>> > to expected behavior.
> >>> >
> >>> > Based on the different views, I hope to see more involvement of PMC
> >>> > members, because this will be a turning point that probable cannot be
> >>> > undone.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > With the new phases, the existing pom will still work, and some user
> >>> opting
> >>> > into after:integration-test knows what they are getting
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > My biggest fear is that this will result in an All-Or-Nothing, and
> I
> >>> like
> >>> > > to prevent that. If the try-finally part works as expected we can
> >>> extract
> >>> > > that part and prepare for one of the next Maven releases.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I’d like to understand your fear better. I’ve been playing with the
> >>> PoC a
> >>> > bit, and TBH it just feels right.
> >>> >
> >>> > For sure I’d prefer a schema change to encoding in a string, but I’m
> >>> also
> >>> > inclined towards string encoded dependency GAVs for 5.x so that
> >>> wouldn’t be
> >>> > the worst if we went that way.
> >>> >
> >>> > With pom rewriting, I think we could do a 4.1.0 model version that
> >>> moved
> >>> > the execution point and priority to attributes, by writing as a 4.0.0
> >>> with
> >>> > the string encoded form... iow rewriting in 4.x allows us to tidy up
> >>> the
> >>> > schema as long as it has a 1:1 mapping to a 4.0.0 modelVersion that
> >>> gets
> >>> > deployed.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Robert
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 12-11-2019 10:25:42, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > > On Tue 12 Nov 2019 at 07:34, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > This is not just MNG-5668, but also contains several non-existing
> >>> > issues,
> >>> > > > that should be mentioned explicitly as they will have huge
> impact:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > - support before:/after: prefix for phase-binding
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > - introduce priority
> >>> > > > - reduce phases (this one hasn't been implemented, but seems to
> be
> >>> the
> >>> > > > reason behind before:/after:)
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > All detailed in the proposal on the wiki:
> >>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Reducing phases would be a big change and not before 4.x at least
> >>> (maybe
> >>> > > 5.x more realistically... at least we’d need to deprecate the
> phases
> >>> for
> >>> > a
> >>> > > good while before removing any)
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I would like see separate branches for all of them, as they all
> >>> have
> >>> > > their
> >>> > > > own discussion.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > The whole point of a PoC is the get feedback. I don’t see utility
> in
> >>> > > separate branches as they are all touching the same code.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Once we get feedback we can decide where we want to go from there.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Robert
> >>> > > > On 11-11-2019 20:31:44, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > https://github.com/apache/maven/tree/mng-5668-poc is my POC
> >>> > > implementation
> >>> > > > for anyone interested in trying it out.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Here's a pom that builds with the PoC
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 4.0.0
> >>> > > > localdomain
> >>> > > > foo
> >>> > > > 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > maven-antrun-plugin
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 1
> >>> > > > before:integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 2
> >>> > > > before:integration-test[1000]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 3
> >>> > > > after:integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 4
> >>> > > > integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 10:55, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > TLDR: We can do better than, but who is in control?
> >>> lifecycle-owner,
> >>> > > > > plugin-owner or pom-owner?
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > I think we all recognize the issues we're trying to solve, but
> >>> to me
> >>> > > this
> >>> > > > > proposal is not the right solution.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > In general there are 2 issues:
> >>> > > > > 1. provide a mechanism that makes sure some executions are
> called
> >>> > even
> >>> > > > its
> >>> > > > > matching main phase fails.
> >>> > > > > 2. provide a mechanism then ensures the order of executions.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > The problem of issue 1 is described in MNG-5668, but not the
> >>> final
> >>> > > > > solution.
> >>> > > > > MNG-5668 proposes to give this power to the *lifecycle-owner*,
> >>> > whereas
> >>> > > > > stage 2 proposes to give the power to the *pom-owner*.
> >>> > > > > Both agree on the same thing: by default these post-phases
> >>> should be
> >>> > > > > triggered even after failure of the matching main phase. This
> is
> >>> > > actually
> >>> > > > > already expected behavior, so I don't expect real issues when
> >>> > > > implementing
> >>> > > > > this adjusted behavior.
> >>> > > > > To me after:integration-test is just an alias for
> >>> > > post-integration-test,
> >>> > > > > both should work the same way.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > Issue 2 is a more common problem: controlling the order of
> >>> > executions.
> >>> > > > > In some cases it is pretty hard or even impossible to get the
> >>> > preferred
> >>> > > > > order. The latter happens when 2 goals of the same plugin must
> be
> >>> > > > executed
> >>> > > > > and a goal of another plugin are competing within the same
> phase.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > So let's first take a look at a phase: is there a clear
> >>> definition?
> >>> > > > > "A phase is a step in what Maven calls a 'build lifecycle'. The
> >>> build
> >>> > > > > lifecycle is an ordered sequence of phases involved in
> building a
> >>> > > > project".
> >>> > > > > "Lifecycle phases are intentionally vague, defined solely as
> >>> > > > > validation, testing, or deployment, and they may mean different
> >>> > things
> >>> > > to
> >>> > > > > different projects."
> >>> > > > > Phases are intended to be called from the commandline, and
> >>> within the
> >>> > > pom
> >>> > > > > you define you can control what should happen before or during
> >>> that
> >>> > > > phase.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > To me changing the content of the -element is a codesmell as it
> >>> > > > > becomes more than just a phase, and we start programming. Why
> do
> >>> we
> >>> > > need
> >>> > > > it?
> >>> > > > > In the end it is all about ensuring the order of plugin
> >>> executions.
> >>> > > > > Stage3+4 proposes to give the power to the *pom-owner*,
> >>> > > > > whereas MPLUGIN-350[2] proposes to give this power to the
> >>> > > *plugin-owner*.
> >>> > > > > IIUR Gradle does not have this issue, because their plugins are
> >>> aware
> >>> > > of
> >>> > > > > input and output. They ensure that if the output plugin X is
> the
> >>> > input
> >>> > > of
> >>> > > > > plugin Y, than X is executed before Y.
> >>> > > > > And we should do the same. And this comes with benefits: we can
> >>> > decide
> >>> > > if
> >>> > > > > executions within a project can be executed in parallel. And
> the
> >>> pom
> >>> > > > stays
> >>> > > > > as clean as it is right now.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > In cases when there's a better ownership than the pom-owner, I
> >>> would
> >>> > > > > prefer to choose that solution. I already notice how people
> >>> (don't)
> >>> > > build
> >>> > > > > up their knowledge regarding poms. The lifecycle-owner and
> >>> > plugin-owner
> >>> > > > > know much better what they're doing.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > thanks,
> >>> > > > > Robert
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > Some food for thoughts: consider a developer that wants to run
> up
> >>> > until
> >>> > > > > pre-integration-test, because he wants to bring his system in a
> >>> > certain
> >>> > > > > state so he can work with IDE to do some work.Can we say that
> If
> >>> And
> >>> > > Only
> >>> > > > > If somebody called the pre-PHASE, there's no reason to end with
> >>> the
> >>> > > > > post-PHASE?
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5668
> >>> > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MPLUGIN-350
> >>> > > > > On 26-10-2019 14:20:50, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > On Sat 26 Oct 2019 at 10:50, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > > To avoid confusion, let's call it stages.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Stage 1: Always call post-bound executions (MNG-5665[1])
> >>> > > > > > Stage 2: before and after
> >>> > > > > > Stage 3: priorities (MNG-3522[2])
> >>> > > > > > Stage 4: transitional lifecycle
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > I have a prototype of stages 1-3 nearly (80%) done... just have
> >>> to
> >>> > > polish
> >>> > > > > up and validate the bound executions with some tests
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > For both all you need to start evaluating the value of phase.
> >>> > > > > > For now we can assume that after:clean is just another label
> >>> for
> >>> > > > > > post-clean and will have exactly the same effect.
> >>> > > > > > MNG-5665 contains a proposal to change the xml, but we
> >>> shouldn't do
> >>> > > > that
> >>> > > > > > (yet). Let's start with a hardcoded list of postphases (or in
> >>> case
> >>> > a
> >>> > > > goal
> >>> > > > > > fails, see if a post-x phase exists). Stage 1 is to make it
> >>> work,
> >>> > > > stage 2
> >>> > > > > > to make it configurable.
> >>> > > > > > IIRC you cannot ask from inside a Mojo if is was called
> >>> explicitly
> >>> > or
> >>> > > > > > because it was bound to a phase, nor can you ask for the
> value
> >>> of
> >>> > > this
> >>> > > > > > phase. I kind of like this, plugins shouldn't care about
> this.
> >>> > > > > > However, inside Maven it will become important at which phase
> >>> it is
> >>> > > to
> >>> > > > > > know if there are more executions to call OR create blocks of
> >>> > > > executions.
> >>> > > > > > Now it is just a list of executions: loop and fail fast.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > thanks,
> >>> > > > > > Robert
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5665
> >>> > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-3522
> >>> > > > > > On 25-10-2019 21:33:14, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > > Robert,
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > I would be fine splitting out into, pardon the pun, phases:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Phase 1: before and after
> >>> > > > > > Phase 2: priorities
> >>> > > > > > Phase 3: transitional lifecycle
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Might have a phase 1.5 of before:* and after:* to catch the
> >>> start
> >>> > of
> >>> > > a
> >>> > > > > > lifecycle and the end of a lifecycle...
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:30, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com [mailto:
> >>> > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > ]>
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Robert, Michael, Tibor, let’s continue here (though I asked
> >>> Infra
> >>> > and
> >>> > > > > it’s
> >>> > > > > > fine that anyone in the community can join our Slack)
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:01, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com [mailto:
> >>> > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > ]>
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases [
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases]
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thoughts?
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > --
> >>> > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > --
> >>> > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Sent from my phone
> >>> >
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from my phone
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Sent from my phone
> >>
> >
>
Re: Dynamic phases proposal
Posted by Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>.
I think this is still waiting for feedback from me. There are parts that I still don't like.
Now that maven-wrapper is mostly done, I will put effort on build-consumer first, because even once implemented, there will be several other tasks that needs to be done.
After that I might have time to evaluate this topic.
Robert
On 25-5-2020 17:43:13, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Stephen,
do we have news about this great feature ?
Enrico
Il giorno sab 23 nov 2019 alle ore 11:51 Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Ok I figured out dynamic lookup from plexus:
>
> $ mvn -version
> Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe;
> 2018-06-17T19:33:14+01:00)
> Maven home: /usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec
> Java version: 1.8.0_152, vendor: Oracle Corporation, runtime:
> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_152.jdk/Contents/Home/jre
> Default locale: en_IE, platform encoding: UTF-8
> OS name: "mac os x", version: "10.14.6", arch: "x86_64", family: "mac"
> $ mvn validate
> [ERROR] The project uses experimental features that require exactly Maven
> 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT -> [Help 1]
> [ERROR]
> [ERROR] To see the full stack trace of the errors, re-run Maven with the -e
> switch.
> [ERROR] Re-run Maven using the -X switch to enable full debug logging.
> [ERROR]
> [ERROR] For more information about the errors and possible solutions,
> please read the following articles:
> [ERROR] [Help 1]
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/MavenExecutionException
>
> Much nicer!
>
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 16:12, Stephen Connolly
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have advanced the PoC a bit more by adding an experiments mechanism.
> >
> > To use the dynamic phases PoC you now need to:
> >
> > 1. Build and install Maven on the branch
> > 2. Add the experiments extension in .mvn/extensions.xml, e.g.
> >
> >
> >
> > xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/EXTENSIONS/1.0.0
> > http://maven.apache.org/xsd/core-extensions-1.0.0.xsd">
> >
> >
> > org.apache.maven
> > maven-experiments
> > 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 3. Update your pom to use the new dynamic phases.
> >
> > The reason for the experiments extension is to guard against assuming the
> > phases will work and prevent "normal" versions of Maven from producing a
> > bad build.
> >
> > Here's a build with the extension enabled:
> >
> > [INFO] Enabling experimental features of Maven 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [INFO] Experimental features enabled:
> > [INFO] * dynamic-phases
> > [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Build Order:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] bar
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] test
> > [pom]
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --------------------------
> > >---------------------------
> > [INFO] Building foo 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [1/3]
> > [INFO] --------------------------------[ jar
> > ]---------------------------------
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:resources (default-resources) @ foo
> > ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/main/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:compile (default-compile) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:testResources
> > (default-testResources) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/test/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:testCompile (default-testCompile) @
> > foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.12.4:test (default-test) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No tests to run.
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (default-jar) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] JAR will be empty - no content was marked for inclusion!
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (2) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] beat you
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (1) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] hi
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (4) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (3) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [echo] bye
> > [INFO] Executed tasks
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Summary for test 1.0-SNAPSHOT:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo ................................................ FAILURE [
> > 2.745 s]
> > [INFO] bar ................................................ SKIPPED
> > [INFO] test ............................................... SKIPPED
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 2.813 s
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2019-11-22T15:43:59Z
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Here's the same project with the extensions disabled
> >
> > [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Build Order:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] bar
> > [jar]
> > [INFO] test
> > [pom]
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --------------------------
> > >---------------------------
> > [INFO] Building foo 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> > [1/3]
> > [INFO] --------------------------------[ jar
> > ]---------------------------------
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:resources (default-resources) @ foo
> > ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/main/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:compile (default-compile) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.6:testResources
> > (default-testResources) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (UTF-8 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
> > /Users/stephenc/tmp/test/foo/src/test/resources
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.1:testCompile (default-testCompile) @
> > foo ---
> > [INFO] No sources to compile
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.12.4:test (default-test) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] No tests to run.
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (default-jar) @ foo ---
> > [WARNING] JAR will be empty - no content was marked for inclusion!
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-antrun-plugin:1.3:run (4) @ foo ---
> > [INFO] Executing tasks
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Reactor Summary for test 1.0-SNAPSHOT:
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] foo ................................................ FAILURE [
> > 0.745 s]
> > [INFO] bar ................................................ SKIPPED
> > [INFO] test ............................................... SKIPPED
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 1.054 s
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2019-11-22T15:43:38Z
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Notice how the dynamic phases are completely ignored if the experiment is
> > not activated
> >
> > And here's the foo pom.xml to show what the executions are
> >
> >
> > 4.0.0
> > localdomain
> > foo
> > 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> >
> >
> >
> > maven-antrun-plugin
> >
> >
> > 1
> > before:integration-test
> >
> > run
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2
> > before:integration-test[1000]
> >
> > run
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 3
> > after:integration-test
> >
> > run
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 4
> > integration-test
> >
> > run
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Finally this is what you get if you have the experiment extension added
> > but try to build with an older version of Maven:
> >
> > [WARNING] Error injecting:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.check.MavenExperimentEnabler
> > java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > org/apache/maven/feature/api/MavenFeatureContext
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0 (Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2020)
> > at com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf
> > (InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create
> > (ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive
> > (InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.space.AbstractDeferredClass.get
> > (AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision
> > (BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get
> > (ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get
> > (SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue
> > (LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue
> > (LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next
> > (EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll (AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants
> > (DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute (DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute (MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain (MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main (MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0 (Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke (Method.java:498)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced
> > (Launcher.java:289)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch
> > (Launcher.java:229)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode
> > (Launcher.java:415)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main
> > (Launcher.java:356)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.api.MavenFeatureContext
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.strategy.SelfFirstStrategy.loadClass
> > (SelfFirstStrategy.java:50)
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.unsynchronizedLoadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:271)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:247)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass
> > (ClassRealm.java:239)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0 (Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors (Class.java:2020)
> > at com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf
> > (InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create
> > (ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive
> > (InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding
> > (InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.space.AbstractDeferredClass.get
> > (AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision
> > (BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision
> > (ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet
> > (ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> > com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get
> > (ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get
> > (SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get
> > (InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get
> > (InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue
> > (LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue
> > (LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next
> > (EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll (AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants
> > (DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute (DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute (DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute (MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain (MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main (MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0 (Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke
> > (DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke (Method.java:498)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced
> > (Launcher.java:289)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch
> > (Launcher.java:229)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode
> > (Launcher.java:415)
> > at org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main
> > (Launcher.java:356)
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > constituent[0]: file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/conf/logging/
> > constituent[1]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-repository-metadata-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[2]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-transport-wagon-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[3]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/aopalliance-1.0.jar
> > constituent[4]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-provider-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[5]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-utils-3.1.0.jar
> > constituent[6]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-interpolation-1.24.jar
> > constituent[7]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-artifact-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[8]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-cipher-1.7.jar
> > constituent[9]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/guava-20.0.jar
> > constituent[10]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-slf4j-provider-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[11]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/slf4j-api-1.7.25.jar
> > constituent[12]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/cdi-api-1.0.jar
> > constituent[13]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jcl-over-slf4j-1.7.25.jar
> > constituent[14]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-spi-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[15]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-compat-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[16]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-plugin-api-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[17]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-sec-dispatcher-1.4.jar
> > constituent[18]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-util-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[19]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/plexus-component-annotations-1.7.1.jar
> > constituent[20]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-settings-builder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[21]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-cli-1.4.jar
> > constituent[22]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-io-2.5.jar
> > constituent[23]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jansi-1.17.1.jar
> > constituent[24]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-core-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[25]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-impl-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[26]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/guice-4.2.0-no_aop.jar
> > constituent[27]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/org.eclipse.sisu.inject-0.3.3.jar
> > constituent[28]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-file-3.1.0.jar
> > constituent[29]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-builder-support-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[30]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-model-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[31]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-settings-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[32]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-http-3.1.0-shaded.jar
> > constituent[33]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-api-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[34]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-resolver-connector-basic-1.1.1.jar
> > constituent[35]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-shared-utils-3.2.1.jar
> > constituent[36]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/org.eclipse.sisu.plexus-0.3.3.jar
> > constituent[37]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-model-builder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[38]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/javax.inject-1.jar
> > constituent[39]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/maven-embedder-3.5.4.jar
> > constituent[40]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/jsr250-api-1.0.jar
> > constituent[41]:
> > file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/commons-lang3-3.5.jar
> > constituent[42]:
> >
> file:/usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.5.4/libexec/lib/wagon-provider-api-3.1.0.jar
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > org/apache/maven/feature/api/MavenFeatureContext
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors0(Native Method)
> > at java.lang.Class.privateGetDeclaredConstructors(Class.java:2671)
> > at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredConstructors(Class.java:2020)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.spi.InjectionPoint.forConstructorOf(InjectionPoint.java:245)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ConstructorBindingImpl.create(ConstructorBindingImpl.java:115)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createUninitializedBinding(InjectorImpl.java:706)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBinding(InjectorImpl.java:929)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.createJustInTimeBindingRecursive(InjectorImpl.java:852)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getJustInTimeBinding(InjectorImpl.java:291)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getBindingOrThrow(InjectorImpl.java:222)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProviderOrThrow(InjectorImpl.java:1040)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider(InjectorImpl.java:1071)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getProvider(InjectorImpl.java:1034)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl.getInstance(InjectorImpl.java:1086)
> > at
> > org.eclipse.sisu.space
> .AbstractDeferredClass.get(AbstractDeferredClass.java:48)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.provision(ProviderInternalFactory.java:85)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.provision(InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:57)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory$1.call(ProviderInternalFactory.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:112)
> > at
> >
> org.eclipse.sisu.bean.BeanScheduler$CycleActivator.onProvision(BeanScheduler.java:230)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback$Provision.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:120)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProvisionListenerStackCallback.provision(ProvisionListenerStackCallback.java:66)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderInternalFactory.circularGet(ProviderInternalFactory.java:61)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.get(InternalFactoryToInitializableAdapter.java:47)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.get(ProviderToInternalFactoryAdapter.java:40)
> > at
> com.google.inject.internal.SingletonScope$1.get(SingletonScope.java:148)
> > at
> >
> com.google.inject.internal.InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.get(InternalFactoryToProviderAdapter.java:39)
> > at com.google.inject.internal.InjectorImpl$1.get(InjectorImpl.java:1050)
> > at org.eclipse.sisu.inject.LazyBeanEntry.getValue(LazyBeanEntry.java:81)
> > at
> org.eclipse.sisu.plexus.LazyPlexusBean.getValue(LazyPlexusBean.java:51)
> > at
> >
> org.eclipse.sisu.wire.EntryListAdapter$ValueIterator.next(EntryListAdapter.java:111)
> > at java.util.AbstractCollection.addAll(AbstractCollection.java:343)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.getLifecycleParticipants(DefaultMaven.java:377)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:206)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:192)
> > at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute(DefaultMaven.java:105)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute(MavenCli.java:954)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain(MavenCli.java:288)
> > at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main(MavenCli.java:192)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> > at
> >
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at
> >
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced(Launcher.java:289)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch(Launcher.java:229)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode(Launcher.java:415)
> > at
> > org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main(Launcher.java:356)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > org.apache.maven.feature.api.MavenFeatureContext
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.strategy.SelfFirstStrategy.loadClass(SelfFirstStrategy.java:50)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.unsynchronizedLoadClass(ClassRealm.java:271)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass(ClassRealm.java:247)
> > at
> >
> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.realm.ClassRealm.loadClass(ClassRealm.java:239)
> > ... 47 more
> >
> > I'd like to make the error message nicer, but I'll need to dig further
> > into Sisu. In any case it has the desired effect of preventing building a
> > project that uses the experiment with a version of Maven that does not
> > support the experimental features.
> >
> > The main point of experiments is to provide a way for people to try out a
> > feature *that requires adapting your project to use that feature* in a
> safe
> > way that prevents users from accidentally building with a different
> version
> > of Maven. My goal would be to maybe release a
> > 3.7.0-alpha-rfc-dynamic-phases-1 build of Maven with this experiment
> turned
> > on to gather wider feedback. Anyone using the feature would then be fully
> > aware that the experiment may end up different when we actually decide
> what
> > we want to do, but can then easily try it out without a big song and
> dance.
> >
> > NOTE: the pom rewriting that Robert has scheduled for 3.7.0 is IMHO not
> > appropriate for this kind of experiment as it doesn't affect the actual
> > build behaviour. If we have implemented pom rewriting correctly, users
> > should not notice and shouldn't need to update their pom. Dynamic phases
> > does require the pom to be updated, hence why it needs a more
> heavy-handed
> > enforcement through extensions (also the enforcer plugin wouldn't
> guarantee
> > execution on all lifecycles, so if you did something in after:clean
> > enforcer wouldn't have run)
> >
> > -Stephen
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 21:16, Stephen Connolly
> > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri 15 Nov 2019 at 15:18, Robert Scholte
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have to admit that when trying to figure out from a Maven perspective
> >>> it felt like post-X should be called with pre-X too, but that opinion
> has
> >>> changed.
> >>> Why would anybody call pre-X? I'd say to bring the system ready to do
> >>> custom X stuff, so it should stop here executing any other phases.
> >>> However, when pre-X fails, I can imagine that post-X should be called
> >>> too, as Maven wasn't able to bring the system in the right state.
> >>>
> >>> The problem lies in that Maven restarts the lifecycle. If only we could
> >>> do something like
> >>> - run up until pre-X (pause the lifecycle execution)
> >>> - do your custom stuff
> >>> - finish with the post-X
> >>>
> >>> Thinking about some kind of pause... This way at least we won't break
> >>> the lifecycle and leave it clean.
> >>>
> >>
> >> That’s easy. Have a Maven-pause-plugin that just waits for you to press
> >> enter. Bind it to integration-test in a profile and presto!
> >>
> >> But that removes the need for the current explicit phases of pre- and
> >> post-
> >>
> >> TBH I think we need to lay down the plan that we want to go towards. It
> >> will take a while to change existing phases, in part because removing
> >> phases is a breaking change. You can have 3rd part plugins that bind
> >> executions to multiple phases, expecting those phases to both exist and
> >> have specific execution behaviour.
> >>
> >> Hence why I think we should go all the way technically, but leave the
> >> lifecycle mostly as-is (modulo adding any new phases and flagging
> existing
> >> phases as deprecated).
> >>
> >> Half measures will only prolong to pain for users.
> >>
> >> If instead we say: “here’s where we were, here’s where we’re going and
> >> this is how we get there” people can incorporate that and adapt
> >>
> >> Messing about with one phase, that’s just hacks. Adding the ability to
> >> define phase execution guarantees... that’s where we want to go. Adding
> the
> >> ability to control plugin execution order within phases... that’s where
> we
> >> want to go... is the syntax where we want to go? Probably not, but it’s
> how
> >> we can get there
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 15-11-2019 11:07:23, Stephen Connolly
> >>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri 15 Nov 2019 at 09:18, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On 13-11-2019 21:46:04, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > On Wed 13 Nov 2019 at 19:29, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > The name of the branch contains MNG-5668, but it contains much
> more.
> >>> > > I'd likely lead to comments like "great", without being explicit
> >>> saying
> >>> > > which part(s).
> >>> > > I am aware there's all proposals touch the same code, but can be
> >>> released
> >>> > > isolated from each other.
> >>> > > e.g. if the enums-value are changed to "pre-" and "post-" it should
> >>> work
> >>> > > for the existing phases, which means we could already use it quite
> >>> soon
> >>> > > (still need to test it myself, though)
> >>> > > I also want to provide a counter proposal, but that takes time and
> >>> for me
> >>> > > there are other issues more important.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > How would you handle the use case that we’ve already had reported:
> >>> >
> >>> > As a user I want to test my integration tests in my IDE by running
> `mvn
> >>> > integration-test` so that the test environment is not torn down and I
> >>> can
> >>> > debug and rerun the tests until I’m ready
> >>> >
> >>> > Robert Scholte:
> >>> > I'd say if they want to set up there environment for the integration
> >>> > tests, they'd be running pre-integration-test.
> >>> > Next select in the IDE the test to execute. I don't see an issue
> here.
> >>> > Calling pre-integration-test implies NOT running
> post-integration-test.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I disagree. I think if you run the pre- phase then you should have the
> >>> post- also run
> >>>
> >>> I think we could have a differential failure mode in the pre-phases
> >>> though.
> >>> Iow a pre- phase failure returns a different exit code than the actual
> >>> phase itself
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Every time I explain people about how Maven works with phases, they
> are
> >>> > amazed it doesn't run the post-phase. I doubt we'll see issues if we
> >>> switch
> >>> > to expected behavior.
> >>> >
> >>> > Based on the different views, I hope to see more involvement of PMC
> >>> > members, because this will be a turning point that probable cannot be
> >>> > undone.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > With the new phases, the existing pom will still work, and some user
> >>> opting
> >>> > into after:integration-test knows what they are getting
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > My biggest fear is that this will result in an All-Or-Nothing, and
> I
> >>> like
> >>> > > to prevent that. If the try-finally part works as expected we can
> >>> extract
> >>> > > that part and prepare for one of the next Maven releases.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I’d like to understand your fear better. I’ve been playing with the
> >>> PoC a
> >>> > bit, and TBH it just feels right.
> >>> >
> >>> > For sure I’d prefer a schema change to encoding in a string, but I’m
> >>> also
> >>> > inclined towards string encoded dependency GAVs for 5.x so that
> >>> wouldn’t be
> >>> > the worst if we went that way.
> >>> >
> >>> > With pom rewriting, I think we could do a 4.1.0 model version that
> >>> moved
> >>> > the execution point and priority to attributes, by writing as a 4.0.0
> >>> with
> >>> > the string encoded form... iow rewriting in 4.x allows us to tidy up
> >>> the
> >>> > schema as long as it has a 1:1 mapping to a 4.0.0 modelVersion that
> >>> gets
> >>> > deployed.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Robert
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 12-11-2019 10:25:42, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > > On Tue 12 Nov 2019 at 07:34, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > This is not just MNG-5668, but also contains several non-existing
> >>> > issues,
> >>> > > > that should be mentioned explicitly as they will have huge
> impact:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > - support before:/after: prefix for phase-binding
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > - introduce priority
> >>> > > > - reduce phases (this one hasn't been implemented, but seems to
> be
> >>> the
> >>> > > > reason behind before:/after:)
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > All detailed in the proposal on the wiki:
> >>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Reducing phases would be a big change and not before 4.x at least
> >>> (maybe
> >>> > > 5.x more realistically... at least we’d need to deprecate the
> phases
> >>> for
> >>> > a
> >>> > > good while before removing any)
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I would like see separate branches for all of them, as they all
> >>> have
> >>> > > their
> >>> > > > own discussion.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > The whole point of a PoC is the get feedback. I don’t see utility
> in
> >>> > > separate branches as they are all touching the same code.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Once we get feedback we can decide where we want to go from there.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Robert
> >>> > > > On 11-11-2019 20:31:44, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > https://github.com/apache/maven/tree/mng-5668-poc is my POC
> >>> > > implementation
> >>> > > > for anyone interested in trying it out.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Here's a pom that builds with the PoC
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 4.0.0
> >>> > > > localdomain
> >>> > > > foo
> >>> > > > 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > maven-antrun-plugin
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 1
> >>> > > > before:integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 2
> >>> > > > before:integration-test[1000]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 3
> >>> > > > after:integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 4
> >>> > > > integration-test
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > run
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 10:55, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > TLDR: We can do better than, but who is in control?
> >>> lifecycle-owner,
> >>> > > > > plugin-owner or pom-owner?
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > I think we all recognize the issues we're trying to solve, but
> >>> to me
> >>> > > this
> >>> > > > > proposal is not the right solution.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > In general there are 2 issues:
> >>> > > > > 1. provide a mechanism that makes sure some executions are
> called
> >>> > even
> >>> > > > its
> >>> > > > > matching main phase fails.
> >>> > > > > 2. provide a mechanism then ensures the order of executions.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > The problem of issue 1 is described in MNG-5668, but not the
> >>> final
> >>> > > > > solution.
> >>> > > > > MNG-5668 proposes to give this power to the *lifecycle-owner*,
> >>> > whereas
> >>> > > > > stage 2 proposes to give the power to the *pom-owner*.
> >>> > > > > Both agree on the same thing: by default these post-phases
> >>> should be
> >>> > > > > triggered even after failure of the matching main phase. This
> is
> >>> > > actually
> >>> > > > > already expected behavior, so I don't expect real issues when
> >>> > > > implementing
> >>> > > > > this adjusted behavior.
> >>> > > > > To me after:integration-test is just an alias for
> >>> > > post-integration-test,
> >>> > > > > both should work the same way.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > Issue 2 is a more common problem: controlling the order of
> >>> > executions.
> >>> > > > > In some cases it is pretty hard or even impossible to get the
> >>> > preferred
> >>> > > > > order. The latter happens when 2 goals of the same plugin must
> be
> >>> > > > executed
> >>> > > > > and a goal of another plugin are competing within the same
> phase.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > So let's first take a look at a phase: is there a clear
> >>> definition?
> >>> > > > > "A phase is a step in what Maven calls a 'build lifecycle'. The
> >>> build
> >>> > > > > lifecycle is an ordered sequence of phases involved in
> building a
> >>> > > > project".
> >>> > > > > "Lifecycle phases are intentionally vague, defined solely as
> >>> > > > > validation, testing, or deployment, and they may mean different
> >>> > things
> >>> > > to
> >>> > > > > different projects."
> >>> > > > > Phases are intended to be called from the commandline, and
> >>> within the
> >>> > > pom
> >>> > > > > you define you can control what should happen before or during
> >>> that
> >>> > > > phase.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > To me changing the content of the -element is a codesmell as it
> >>> > > > > becomes more than just a phase, and we start programming. Why
> do
> >>> we
> >>> > > need
> >>> > > > it?
> >>> > > > > In the end it is all about ensuring the order of plugin
> >>> executions.
> >>> > > > > Stage3+4 proposes to give the power to the *pom-owner*,
> >>> > > > > whereas MPLUGIN-350[2] proposes to give this power to the
> >>> > > *plugin-owner*.
> >>> > > > > IIUR Gradle does not have this issue, because their plugins are
> >>> aware
> >>> > > of
> >>> > > > > input and output. They ensure that if the output plugin X is
> the
> >>> > input
> >>> > > of
> >>> > > > > plugin Y, than X is executed before Y.
> >>> > > > > And we should do the same. And this comes with benefits: we can
> >>> > decide
> >>> > > if
> >>> > > > > executions within a project can be executed in parallel. And
> the
> >>> pom
> >>> > > > stays
> >>> > > > > as clean as it is right now.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > In cases when there's a better ownership than the pom-owner, I
> >>> would
> >>> > > > > prefer to choose that solution. I already notice how people
> >>> (don't)
> >>> > > build
> >>> > > > > up their knowledge regarding poms. The lifecycle-owner and
> >>> > plugin-owner
> >>> > > > > know much better what they're doing.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > thanks,
> >>> > > > > Robert
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > Some food for thoughts: consider a developer that wants to run
> up
> >>> > until
> >>> > > > > pre-integration-test, because he wants to bring his system in a
> >>> > certain
> >>> > > > > state so he can work with IDE to do some work.Can we say that
> If
> >>> And
> >>> > > Only
> >>> > > > > If somebody called the pre-PHASE, there's no reason to end with
> >>> the
> >>> > > > > post-PHASE?
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5668
> >>> > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MPLUGIN-350
> >>> > > > > On 26-10-2019 14:20:50, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > On Sat 26 Oct 2019 at 10:50, Robert Scholte wrote:
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > > To avoid confusion, let's call it stages.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Stage 1: Always call post-bound executions (MNG-5665[1])
> >>> > > > > > Stage 2: before and after
> >>> > > > > > Stage 3: priorities (MNG-3522[2])
> >>> > > > > > Stage 4: transitional lifecycle
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > I have a prototype of stages 1-3 nearly (80%) done... just have
> >>> to
> >>> > > polish
> >>> > > > > up and validate the bound executions with some tests
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > For both all you need to start evaluating the value of phase.
> >>> > > > > > For now we can assume that after:clean is just another label
> >>> for
> >>> > > > > > post-clean and will have exactly the same effect.
> >>> > > > > > MNG-5665 contains a proposal to change the xml, but we
> >>> shouldn't do
> >>> > > > that
> >>> > > > > > (yet). Let's start with a hardcoded list of postphases (or in
> >>> case
> >>> > a
> >>> > > > goal
> >>> > > > > > fails, see if a post-x phase exists). Stage 1 is to make it
> >>> work,
> >>> > > > stage 2
> >>> > > > > > to make it configurable.
> >>> > > > > > IIRC you cannot ask from inside a Mojo if is was called
> >>> explicitly
> >>> > or
> >>> > > > > > because it was bound to a phase, nor can you ask for the
> value
> >>> of
> >>> > > this
> >>> > > > > > phase. I kind of like this, plugins shouldn't care about
> this.
> >>> > > > > > However, inside Maven it will become important at which phase
> >>> it is
> >>> > > to
> >>> > > > > > know if there are more executions to call OR create blocks of
> >>> > > > executions.
> >>> > > > > > Now it is just a list of executions: loop and fail fast.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > thanks,
> >>> > > > > > Robert
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5665
> >>> > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-3522
> >>> > > > > > On 25-10-2019 21:33:14, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > > Robert,
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > I would be fine splitting out into, pardon the pun, phases:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Phase 1: before and after
> >>> > > > > > Phase 2: priorities
> >>> > > > > > Phase 3: transitional lifecycle
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Might have a phase 1.5 of before:* and after:* to catch the
> >>> start
> >>> > of
> >>> > > a
> >>> > > > > > lifecycle and the end of a lifecycle...
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:30, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com [mailto:
> >>> > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > ]>
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Robert, Michael, Tibor, let’s continue here (though I asked
> >>> Infra
> >>> > and
> >>> > > > > it’s
> >>> > > > > > fine that anyone in the community can join our Slack)
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > On Fri 25 Oct 2019 at 20:01, Stephen Connolly
> >>> > > > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com [mailto:
> >>> > > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > ]>
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases [
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Dynamic+phases]
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thoughts?
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > > > --
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > --
> >>> > > > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > --
> >>> > > Sent from my phone
> >>> > >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Sent from my phone
> >>> >
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from my phone
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Sent from my phone
> >>
> >
>