Re: [tycho-user] Problem getting Tycho to use a local .target file

["Rizzo, Eric" <Eric.Rizzo@xxxxxxx>]

On 11/19/12 4:20 AM, "Sievers, Jan" <jan.sievers@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>>a) reference the hand-written "master" pom that I have written (which
>>would be checked in)
>
>>So, what's the best strategy for handling this case, where we want to
>>leverage pom generation but it needs to refer to another pom as its
>>parent?
>
>I could imagine that the pomgenerator plugin is extended to support a
>custom parent (case a) above.
>This would mean the restriction that all your plugin/feature/repository
>pom.xml's can't be customized but if you are fine with that, I guess
>that's OK.
>
>Regards
>Jan

On 11/19/12 7:33 AM, "Oberlies, Tobias" <tobias.oberlies@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>Actually, I think that the tycho-pomgenerator-plugin was originally
>designed for a POM-less build, but this approach was abandoned a while
>ago.
>
>This means that tycho-pomgenerator-plugin won't give you complete results
>for the more modern Tycho features like target files. It should be
>possible to extend the plugin to also cover target files (including the
>eclipse-target-definition packaging type), and this would make sense, but
>we would need you to do it. I don't think that the use case is important
>to any of the committers, so don't expect us to implement it.
>
>If this is an option for you, please follow the Contributor's Guide [1]
>


I'm working with the release/build engineer who has an existing PDE
Build-based build working, and it uses significant custom Ant scripts to
perform additional steps in front of and beyond PDE Build. After
evaluating the choices, it's likely we'll also need additional steps
beyond Tycho, so we'll probably go that route. As much as I'd like to be
"clean" (IOW, extend the pom generator to accommodate our needs), there
isn't time budget for it, unfortunately. It's too bad, because we don't
really need to customize the plugin or feature poms, just the
master/parent. I guess that's a good thing though, because maintaining
100+ individual poms would probably be a nightmare.

Thanks for the insight anyway,
Eric