Profile activation/deactivation

[Paul Gier]

I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile activation and
deactivation.  While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some cases where the current
behaviour might be improved.


1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one activeByDefault
profile and I manually activate one of them?  Currently, if I have two
activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and profile2, and I run "mvn -P+profile1"
then profile1 stays active and profile2 is deactivated.  This also bring up the
following more general question.


2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another profile is
activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in 2.0.x, but
for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default profiles active unless
explicitly disabled.

If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes sense to
activate one and have the default profile be deactivated.  But IMO that seems to
be a less common use case vs. using profiles to activate particular parts of a
build and not normally interfering with each other.  In this case it seems more
intuitive that an activeByDefault profile is always active unless deactivated.
In addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as needed from the command
line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a need to have activeByDefault
profiles automatically turn off.


3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.  So the
command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile

This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I created
MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already use "-" for
this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as another option for
disabling a profile in 2.1.


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

[Benjamin Bentmann]

Paul Gier wrote:

> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
> So the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile

Unless some severe drawback is reported, +1 on this because "!" is quite
natural among programmers for negation and also matches the existing syntax
for negation of profile activation conditions in the POM.



Benjamin


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

[Brian E Fox]

<snip>
Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:

>3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
So the
>command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile

>This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
created
>MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already use
"-" for
>this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as another
option for
>disabling a profile in 2.1.

As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is better...I think
the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as well...we don't need
more proliferation of changes.

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

[Paul Gier]

Brian E. Fox wrote:

> <snip>
> Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
>
>> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
> So the
>> command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>
>> This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> created
>> MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already use
> "-" for
>> this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as another
> option for
>> disabling a profile in 2.1.
>
> As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is better...I think
> the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as well...we don't need
> more proliferation of changes.
>

Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be redundant if we add "!"?

So some examples would be:
mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3

And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3







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

[jmcconnell]

I think the ! is probably better then D: E: E:

jesse

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Paul Gier <pgier@...> wrote:

> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
> >
> >
> > > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
> > >
> > So the
> >
> > > command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
> > >
> >
> >
> > > This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> > >
> > created
> >
> > > MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already use
> > >
> > "-" for
> >
> > > this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as another
> > >
> > option for
> >
> > > disabling a profile in 2.1.
> > >
> >
> > As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is better...I think
> > the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as well...we don't need
> > more proliferation of changes.
> >
> >
>
>  Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be redundant if we
> add "!"?
>
>  So some examples would be:
>  mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3
>
>  And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
>  mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@...

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

[Brian E Fox]

>Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be redundant if
we add "!"?

I would.

>So some examples would be:
>mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3

Yep.

>And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
>mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3

I would make it the same as 2.0 above.






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


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

[Bernhard David]

Hello,

here's a suggestion Re. point 2

> 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another
profile is
> activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in
2.0.x, but
> for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default profiles active
unless
> explicitly disabled.

would it be possible to have "-Pprofile" work as usual (activate
profile, deactivate defaults) but "-P+profile" add profile to the
existing ones, without deactivating defaults? Or if "+" is taken we
could use some other character.

In any case it would be really useful to add profiles like this, for
instance to support "mvn install -P+optionalTests" without having to
figure out what other profiles you need manually.

Greetings,

David Bernhard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jesse McConnell [mailto:jesse.mcconnell@...]
> Sent: 15 May 2008 00:04
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Profile activation/deactivation
>
> I think the ! is probably better then D: E: E:
>
> jesse
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Paul Gier <pgier@...> wrote:
> > Brian E. Fox wrote:
> >
> > > <snip>
> > > Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
> > >
> > >
> > > > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to
> disable a profile.
> > > >
> > > So the
> > >
> > > > command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using
> a dash, and I
> > > >
> > > created
> > >
> > > > MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we
> can already use
> > > >
> > > "-" for
> > >
> > > > this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added
> as another
> > > >
> > > option for
> > >
> > > > disabling a profile in 2.1.
> > > >
> > >
> > > As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is
> better...I think
> > > the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as
> well...we don't need
> > > more proliferation of changes.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >  Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be
> redundant if we
> > add "!"?
> >
> >  So some examples would be:
> >  mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3
> >
> >  And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
> >  mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> >  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> jesse mcconnell
> jesse.mcconnell@...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

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

[nicolas de loof-3]

I like this suggestion.

using -P !profile to disable a profile is consistent with negation in
properties activation, but the "-" symbol is also fine, if the feature works
;-)

using -P +profile is a comprehensible way to *add* a profile to the default
active profile list. But some may prefer to use another symbol ?

considering those two options, using -P profile to set from the command line
the *exact *list of profiles to be enabled (disable default active profiles)
is consistent.

Maven 2.1 syntax for profiles is not very nice to read... I'd prefer either
the same +/- syntax, or some --enable-profile x (-P x), --disable-profile y
(-dP y)


2008/5/15 Bernhard David <david.bernhard@...>:

> Hello,
>
> here's a suggestion Re. point 2
>
> > 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another
> profile is
> > activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in
> 2.0.x, but
> > for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default profiles active
> unless
> > explicitly disabled.
>
> would it be possible to have "-Pprofile" work as usual (activate
> profile, deactivate defaults) but "-P+profile" add profile to the
> existing ones, without deactivating defaults? Or if "+" is taken we
> could use some other character.
>
> In any case it would be really useful to add profiles like this, for
> instance to support "mvn install -P+optionalTests" without having to
> figure out what other profiles you need manually.
>
> Greetings,
>
> David Bernhard
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jesse McConnell [mailto:jesse.mcconnell@...]
> > Sent: 15 May 2008 00:04
> > To: Maven Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Profile activation/deactivation
> >
> > I think the ! is probably better then D: E: E:
> >
> > jesse
> >
> > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Paul Gier <pgier@...> wrote:
> > > Brian E. Fox wrote:
> > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to
> > disable a profile.
> > > > >
> > > > So the
> > > >
> > > > > command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using
> > a dash, and I
> > > > >
> > > > created
> > > >
> > > > > MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we
> > can already use
> > > > >
> > > > "-" for
> > > >
> > > > > this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added
> > as another
> > > > >
> > > > option for
> > > >
> > > > > disabling a profile in 2.1.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is
> > better...I think
> > > > the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as
> > well...we don't need
> > > > more proliferation of changes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >  Should I remove both "-" and "+" since they would both be
> > redundant if we
> > > add "!"?
> > >
> > >  So some examples would be:
> > >  mvn -P !profile1,profile2,profile3
> > >
> > >  And in maven 2.1 currently this can also be expressed with:
> > >  mvn -P D:profile1,E:profile2,E:profile3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> > >  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > jesse mcconnell
> > jesse.mcconnell@...
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

[mihobson]

Would a concept of profile groups help to determine which profiles are
meant to be mutually exclusive?

I use mutually exclusive profiles for different deployment
configurations, for example development and production.  By default,
the development profile is actived by default, so currently
-Pproduction would disable the development profile and enable the
production profile.  The proposed changes would require
-P!development,production, which is a little cumbersome and prone to
error.

+1 for using the !-notation for disabling profiles.

Mark

2008/5/14 Paul Gier <pgier@...>:

>
> I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile activation
> and deactivation.  While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some cases where the
> current behaviour might be improved.
>
>
> 1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one activeByDefault
> profile and I manually activate one of them?  Currently, if I have two
> activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and profile2, and I run "mvn -P+profile1"
> then profile1 stays active and profile2 is deactivated.  This also bring up
> the following more general question.
>
>
> 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another profile
> is activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in
> 2.0.x, but for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default profiles
> active unless explicitly disabled.
>
> If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes sense to
> activate one and have the default profile be deactivated.  But IMO that
> seems to be a less common use case vs. using profiles to activate particular
> parts of a build and not normally interfering with each other.  In this case
> it seems more intuitive that an activeByDefault profile is always active
> unless deactivated. In addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as
> needed from the command line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a need to
> have activeByDefault profiles automatically turn off.
>
>
> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.  So
> the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>
> This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> created MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already
> use "-" for this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as
> another option for disabling a profile in 2.1.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

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

[nicolas de loof-3]

Same use case here.

IMHO having a distinction between "-P profile" and "-P +profile" is
acceptable. "-P profile" may work as it does today (specify the exact list
of profiles, whith auto-disabled default ones). For backward compatibility,
but also to enable exclusive profiles switching.


2008/5/15 Mark Hobson <markhobson@...>:

> Would a concept of profile groups help to determine which profiles are
> meant to be mutually exclusive?
>
> I use mutually exclusive profiles for different deployment
> configurations, for example development and production.  By default,
> the development profile is actived by default, so currently
> -Pproduction would disable the development profile and enable the
> production profile.  The proposed changes would require
> -P!development,production, which is a little cumbersome and prone to
> error.
>
> +1 for using the !-notation for disabling profiles.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/5/14 Paul Gier <pgier@...>:
> >
> > I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile activation
> > and deactivation.  While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some cases where
> the
> > current behaviour might be improved.
> >
> >
> > 1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one
> activeByDefault
> > profile and I manually activate one of them?  Currently, if I have two
> > activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and profile2, and I run "mvn
> -P+profile1"
> > then profile1 stays active and profile2 is deactivated.  This also bring
> up
> > the following more general question.
> >
> >
> > 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another
> profile
> > is activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be changed in
> > 2.0.x, but for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving default
> profiles
> > active unless explicitly disabled.
> >
> > If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes sense
> to
> > activate one and have the default profile be deactivated.  But IMO that
> > seems to be a less common use case vs. using profiles to activate
> particular
> > parts of a build and not normally interfering with each other.  In this
> case
> > it seems more intuitive that an activeByDefault profile is always active
> > unless deactivated. In addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as
> > needed from the command line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a need
> to
> > have activeByDefault profiles automatically turn off.
> >
> >
> > 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a profile.
>  So
> > the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
> >
> > This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> > created MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already
> > use "-" for this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as
> > another option for disabling a profile in 2.1.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

[Ralph Goers]

Paul Gier wrote:

>
> I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile
> activation and deactivation.  While working on MNG-3545 I noticed some
> cases where the current behaviour might be improved.
>
>
> 1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one
> activeByDefault profile and I manually activate one of them?  
> Currently, if I have two activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and
> profile2, and I run "mvn -P+profile1" then profile1 stays active and
> profile2 is deactivated.  This also bring up the following more
> general question.

Seems right to me.

>
>
> 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another
> profile is activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should be
> changed in 2.0.x, but for 2.1 I think it's worth considering leaving
> default profiles active unless explicitly disabled.
>
> If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes
> sense to activate one and have the default profile be deactivated.  
> But IMO that seems to be a less common use case vs. using profiles to
> activate particular parts of a build and not normally interfering with
> each other.  In this case it seems more intuitive that an
> activeByDefault profile is always active unless deactivated. In
> addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as needed from the
> command line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a need to have
> activeByDefault profiles automatically turn off.
>

I just implemented a project where this behavior was required. In the
default case I build and test with SLF4J and logback. In test 2 I test
with SLF4J and Log4j. If the default was never turned off then I'd have
no way of doing this unless there was no default.

>
> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a
> profile.  So the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>
> This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> created MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can
> already use "-" for this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was
> added as another option for disabling a profile in 2.1.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

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

[Ralph Goers]

+1.  My first reaction though was the thought, what should -P-profile
do? Is it confusing not to have it if + is supported? Would it be the
same as -P!profile?

Bernhard David wrote:

>
>
> would it be possible to have "-Pprofile" work as usual (activate
> profile, deactivate defaults) but "-P+profile" add profile to the
> existing ones, without deactivating defaults? Or if "+" is taken we
> could use some other character.
>
> In any case it would be really useful to add profiles like this, for
> instance to support "mvn install -P+optionalTests" without having to
> figure out what other profiles you need manually.
>
> Greetings,
>
> David Bernhard
>
>  
>  

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

[John Casey-5]

The activeByDefault flag was originally designed to allow profiles to  
work as a group, with a default selection. Obviously, it's an  
incomplete design, since it doesn't allow for profiles that _aren't_  
part of that grouping to be activated/deactivated independently. As  
for the default profiles remaining active until deactivated, I think  
this would be the most intuitive behavior, though I'd still really  
like to see profile groups where there can be a default "selection"  
that is active unless another profile in that group is activated.  
Also, in the past there has been some quirks with the deactivation  
flag, that seemed to keep it from working (at least in some cases).  
No, I don't have specifics, but I can remember it coming up  
before. :) I think if we straighten out the notation for activating/
deactivating, then make sure it works on all platforms (it may have  
been something about commons-cli snagging on a leading '-' for the  
deactivation of a single profile), we should make defaults stay  
active until deactivated. Later, if we find a good mechanism for the  
profile grouping I was originally striving for, we can implement it  
in 2.2+ or something.

As for the E: and D: prefixes, this is something I threw in the other  
day to see if it would improve things. I wasn't sure whether it was a  
good idea or not, but it's easy enough to take out since nothing has  
been released. Also, I think having '!' in there is a good idea, even  
though +/- are already in use. What's the harm in adding more than  
one way of doing this?

-john

On May 14, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Paul Gier wrote:

>
> I would like to bring up a couple of issues related to profile  
> activation and deactivation.  While working on MNG-3545 I noticed  
> some cases where the current behaviour might be improved.
>
>
> 1. What is the correct behaviour when there is more than one  
> activeByDefault profile and I manually activate one of them?  
> Currently, if I have two activeByDefault profiles, profile1 and  
> profile2, and I run "mvn -P+profile1" then profile1 stays active  
> and profile2 is deactivated.  This also bring up the following more  
> general question.
>
>
> 2. Should default profiles be automatically deactivated if another  
> profile is activated?  I don't think the current behaviour should  
> be changed in 2.0.x, but for 2.1 I think it's worth considering  
> leaving default profiles active unless explicitly disabled.
>
> If you think of profiles as being mutually exclusive, then it makes  
> sense to activate one and have the default profile be deactivated.  
> But IMO that seems to be a less common use case vs. using profiles  
> to activate particular parts of a build and not normally  
> interfering with each other.  In this case it seems more intuitive  
> that an activeByDefault profile is always active unless  
> deactivated. In addition, now that profiles can be deactivated as  
> needed from the command line, there doesn't seem to be as much of a  
> need to have activeByDefault profiles automatically turn off.
>
>
> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a  
> profile.  So the command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>
> This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and  
> I created MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can  
> already use "-" for this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile"  
> was added as another option for disabling a profile in 2.1.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ejlife/john

[John Casey-5]

I looked at the logic for +/- the other day (when I added E: and D:,  
fwiw), and the logic was backward, IIRC...I fixed it in 2.1, but it  
may still be broken in 2.0.x, not sure...

-john

On May 14, 2008, at 5:44 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:

> <snip>
> Need to think about 1& 2 some more but:
>
>> 3. There was a suggestion to allow the use of "!" to disable a  
>> profile.
> So the
>> command line would look like: mvn -P!myProfile
>
>> This seems more intuitive than the current syntax using a dash, and I
> created
>> MNG-3571 for it.  But I'm hesitant to add it since we can already use
> "-" for
>> this, and it looks like "mvn -P D:myProfile" was added as another
> option for
>> disabling a profile in 2.1.
>
> As far as I know, the - never worked so going to ! is better...I think
> the 2.1 deactivation should be brought in line as well...we don't need
> more proliferation of changes.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ejlife/john

[Jesse McConnell]

No one can dispute the nice things that profiles let us accomplish in
terms of toggling on functionalities...

But I wonder much this will impact build reproducibility....especially
given the existence of profiles in the settings.xml file.  It is
already a source of minor pain where people need to pass around
fragments of profiles to get their builds (or releases) working.  I
wonder how much making it easier to toggle on and off profiles will
impact the future of these sorts of practices.

I already have to edit my settings.xml file and comment in and out a
certain profile if I want to deploy something from one place or
another.  I could override on the cli but thats a big pita as well.
John and I talked ages ago about how profiles were basically a hack
and black magic in what they allowed people to do with any given
build.  Seeing all of these +/-/D:/E:/! goop floating around seems to
be increasing the black magic.  I am torn though, profiles have helped
me immeasurably in the past...even if they made me feel a touch dirty
in the process.

Are we missing a chance to codify some other sort of functionality
that keeps build reproducibility at the forefront?  And by build
reproducibility I mean out of the box, not after cut and pasting magic
chunks of stuff around behind the scenes.

anywho, figured I would throw that out.
jesse

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Ralph Goers
<Ralph.Goers@...> wrote:

> +1.  My first reaction though was the thought, what should -P-profile do? Is
> it confusing not to have it if + is supported? Would it be the same as
> -P!profile?
>
>
>  Bernhard David wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > would it be possible to have "-Pprofile" work as usual (activate
> > profile, deactivate defaults) but "-P+profile" add profile to the
> > existing ones, without deactivating defaults? Or if "+" is taken we
> > could use some other character.
> >
> > In any case it would be really useful to add profiles like this, for
> > instance to support "mvn install -P+optionalTests" without having to
> > figure out what other profiles you need manually.
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > David Bernhard
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@...

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