Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

AssembleMojo.java:45-55: Make up with idea how to get rid... #2679

Open
0pdd opened this issue Dec 6, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

AssembleMojo.java:45-55: Make up with idea how to get rid... #2679

0pdd opened this issue Dec 6, 2023 · 0 comments
Milestone

Comments

@0pdd
Copy link

0pdd commented Dec 6, 2023

The puzzle 2406-424948df from #2406 has to be resolved:

* @todo #2406:90min Make up with idea how to get rid of duplicate parameters between mojos.
* There's a situation where AssembleMojo owns, creates and executes other mojos,
* like {@link ParseMojo} or {@link OptimizeMojo}. When we configure our compiler via pom.xml maven
* tries to set parameters directly to the calling mojo. That's why we must to have all parameters
* from child mojos in AssembleMojo or {@link SafeMojo} (in order they won't be skipped and lost).
* That causes duplication of parameters between "parent" mojo and "child" mojos.
* Also it obliges the developer to remember that if he adds new parameter to some child mojo,
* this parameter must be present in parent mojo as well.
* We didn't find a way how we can resolve such duplication at the moment.
* So we need to either accept this as impossible to solve or resolve somehow.
* Anyway don't forget to remove the puzzle when the decision about the puzzle is made.

The puzzle was created by @rultor on 06-Dec-23.

Estimate: 90 minutes, role: DEV.

If you have any technical questions, don't ask me, submit new tickets instead. The task will be "done" when the problem is fixed and the text of the puzzle is removed from the source code. Here is more about PDD and about me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants