The Jetty6RunWar class (http://www.mortbay.org/jetty/jetty-7/xref/org/mortbay/jetty/plugin/Jetty6RunWar.html) has @execute phase="package".

So I've made a simple test by making a copy of the whole class, named Jetty6RunWarNoFork, with only slightly changed annotations and building jetty-maven-plugin:

original Jetty6RunWar.java:

...

• @goal run-war
• @requiresDependencyResolution runtime
• @execute phase="package"
• @description Runs jetty6 on a war file
  *
  */
  public class Jetty6RunWar extends AbstractJetty6Mojo
  {
  ...

New Jetty6RunWarNoFork.java (note the changed goal name and execute phase):

...
/**

• <p>
• This goal is used to run Jetty with an already assembled war.
• </p>
• @goal run-war-nofork
• @requiresDependencyResolution runtime
• @execute phase="validate"
• @description Runs jetty6 on a war file
  *
  */
  public class Jetty6RunWarNoFork extends AbstractJetty6Mojo
  ...

With that new goal, my project's integration tests run fine - Jetty is started before the tests and closed shortly after they finish. The execution configuration of jetty-maven-plugin is:

<executions>

<execution>
<id>start-jetty</id>
<phase>test-compile</phase>
<goals>
<goal>run-war-nofork</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<scanIntervalSeconds>0</scanIntervalSeconds>
<daemon>true</daemon>
<reload>manual</reload>
</configuration>
</execution>

<execution>
<id>stop-jetty</id>
<phase>test</phase>
<goals>
<goal>stop</goal>
</goals>
</execution>

</executions>

I think this improvement deserves integrating into official jetty-maven-plugin release.

However, making a copy of the whole class's code seems unreasonable and messy.

Maybe inheritance from Jetty6RunWar mojo?

Does the parent mojo class have to be abstract or can we make "public class Jetty6RunWarNoFork extends Jetty6RunWar"?

Implements the run-war-nofork goal.

I tested it on my machine and it seems to work properly.