maven-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hervé Boutemy (JIRA) <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (MJAR-264) finalName property can be set and is not immutable
Date Sat, 18 May 2019 05:36:00 GMT


Hervé Boutemy commented on MJAR-264:

sorry, I don't understand.
Ok, in your example pom, the value of POM is overriden
then replaces the value from super pom:

1. I don't know why you tell this should not be permitted (even if the value chosen in your
example is not a good idea, and I don't know if there is really a good value other than the
default one from super-pom)
2. but more importantly: the value is not muted once the effective POM is build, then every
plugin referencing ${} will get the same result

Making plugin finalName parameter read only with value ${} means that
the plugin will follow whatever the name is defined in the effective pom: this will ensure
every file attached to the gav will have the same prefix name

It's not really about "immutability" at runtime, but consistent value for every packaging
file created by plugins (by removing customization feature)

I confess that perhaps Maven core should not not permit people to override
in their pom.xml, since the default value is so critical as a convention for the repository
format: but this is another feature request, more at MNG level

> finalName property can be set and is not immutable
> --------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: MJAR-264
>                 URL:
>             Project: Maven JAR Plugin
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.1.1
>            Reporter: Stephane Nicoll
>            Priority: Major
> From what I understood, the intention of making sure the {{finalName}} is read-only was
to prevent users to be able to mutate its value while the build was running. Rather, they
should use the standard {{build/finalName}} that is immutable.
> Unfortunately, both these are happening at the moment. There is a bug so that {{read-only}}
is ignored and the field can be set anyway. And because the field as a default to the standard
property, its value is evaluated lazily and can change based on the execution of another plugin.
> Here is a simple project that reproduces the problem with the latest version of the plugin: []
> The Spring Boot Maven Plugin has the exact same setup (actually we did align our plugin
to what the jar plugin did for consistency). We broke users by removing the field when we
noticed one can still set it and we are looking for advices as what to do. We want to make
sure that the decision we take is align with the direction of core plugins.
> Thanks!

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message