Hi Kohsuke,
On 12/7/06, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <Kohsuke.Kawaguchi_at_sun.com> wrote:
> Gregory Kick wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > You're definitely on track with what I was thinking. The only other
> > plugin that I've ever seen implement something like this is the
> > xmlbeans plugin, which has a whole seperate goal for it. I think that
> > the flag makes more sense.
>
> Perhaps I'm too late, but the general practice for doing this is that
> the Maven plugin creates one Abstract Mojo that does most of the work,
> then derive two actual Mojos from there --- one for source and the other
> for test-source.
The jaxb1 plugin is indeed structured like that: One abstract, that
does most of the job, and the actual mojo that provides the params,
logging, etc. Also, the hj2 plugin extends the abstract class.
So technically, it is very easy to do it.
But, i do question the need for such functionality.
I'm not sure whether there will be a need also for separate test
dependencies, separate reports and javadocs, separate lifecycle. In
the end, we will start duplicating all pom functionality.
That is why i think it is best to build the required test sources into
a jar using a separate pom, and included the result jar with
scope=test.
Regards,
Kostis