Mixing extra jvm arguments for the surefire-maven-plugin with jacoco

[ghost]

Noticed that the maven jacoco plugin appends the agent to the argLine property of the surefire plugin. Since I need to add some additional parameters to the jvm cmdline I ended up using something similar to this <argLine>-foobar ${argLine}</argLine> in order to preserve the jacoco agent. All works OK if I don't disable the jacoco plugin using the skip property. If I do that I end up with an argLine property which is not initialized and because of that the actual string "${argLine}" is appended to the jvm command line.

Is there a better way to handle extra surefire jvm arguments with the jacoco plugin?

<plugin>
    <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
    <artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId>
    <version>2.12.1</version>
    <configuration>
        <forkMode>once</forkMode>
        <argLine>-foobar ${argLine}</argLine>
    </configuration>
</plugin>

<plugin>
  <groupId>org.jacoco</groupId>
  <artifactId>jacoco-maven-plugin</artifactId>
  <version>${jacoco.version}</version>
  <executions>
    <execution>
      <goals>
        <goal>prepare-agent</goal>
      </goals>
      <configuration>
        <skip>${jacoco.skip}</skip>
      </configuration>
    </execution>
    <execution>
      <id>report</id>
      <phase>prepare-package</phase>
      <goals>
        <goal>report</goal>
      </goals>
      <configuration>
        <skip>${jacoco.skip}</skip>
      </configuration>
    </execution>
  </executions>
</plugin>

[marchof]

BTW, the agent Ant task works the same way: If it is not enabled it sets the property to the empty string:

http://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/trunk/doc/ant.html#agent

[ghost]

Hi,

Not sure what the process is for having the patch reviewed and merged. Please let me know if you need further changes / info from me.

[Godin]

@isavin Hi, first of all - thanks for your contribution, I'll review patch as soon as possible on this week, when I'll have free time and that's why it's assigned to me ;)

[Godin]

Done in ca86383

[mfriedenhagen]

@Controlix, you are right, there was a regression fixed with pull request
#192, which will be part of 0.6.5. So running the 0.6.5-SNAPSHOT should
work for you.