You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For example, mvn deploy:deploy-file does not require a pom.xml locally but does need settings depending upon to where you're trying to deploy.
Given that pom.xml is the default project object model and is used in the 5 9s cases in almost every maven project ever, why can we not rely on the default to use pom.xml instead of calling it explicitly when there are use cases that don't make sense to require it for that then force you to either manually run the command outside branchout (defeating the purpose) or create a fake pom with just parent and basics just to satisfy the requirement and let it run okay.
I never understood this, however it didn't cause me any trouble until recently, so I never complained about it (mentioned it a year or so back, but that's it).
Are there any valid reasons why we can't simply stop doing that?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Assuming you have a branchout projection and are using maven you probably
have a project that has a pom. But i guess there is no need to explicitly
set it.
Try change it and see if the tests pass.
For example,
mvn deploy:deploy-file
does not require a pom.xml locally but does need settings depending upon to where you're trying to deploy.Given that pom.xml is the default project object model and is used in the 5 9s cases in almost every maven project ever, why can we not rely on the default to use pom.xml instead of calling it explicitly when there are use cases that don't make sense to require it for that then force you to either manually run the command outside branchout (defeating the purpose) or create a fake pom with just parent and basics just to satisfy the requirement and let it run okay.
I never understood this, however it didn't cause me any trouble until recently, so I never complained about it (mentioned it a year or so back, but that's it).
Are there any valid reasons why we can't simply stop doing that?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: