Details
-
Type:
New Feature
-
Status:
Closed
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Affects Version/s: None
-
Fix Version/s: 2.0
-
Component/s: None
-
Labels:None
-
Environment:OSX 10.4.3, java 1.4.2_09
-
Number of attachments :
Description
The problem is that the scm url element in the pom which is supposed to be a link to "The URL to the project's browsable CVS repository." is not necessarily the same link you might use to show a file in the repository.
I think this should be a configurable parameter instead.
As such, it is impossible for me to have both the Source Repository report generate a correct link and have the changelog generate a correct link. I have to choose one or the other.
Examples:
To browse repository:
http://apollo.ucalgary.ca/websvncommons/listing.php?repname=pmgt&rev=0&sc=0&path=/trunk/pmgt-jar
The difference is the script used to generate the page. I have a patch which uses a configurable parameter if interested, but I'm not sure this is the best approach, given some work also needs to be done with regards to submodule report generation.
Attachments
Issue Links
| This issue is related to: | ||||
| MPCHANGELOG-74 | changelog plugin creates wrong links for Subversion repositories |
|
|
|
| MCHANGELOG-16 | when using svn, links are wrong |
|
|
|
This patch does 3 things.
1. It adds a parameter called displayFileDetailUrl.
2. If this parameter is detected in the config for this plugin in the pom, then it will be used preferentially over the scm url provided in the pom to create links to files in your scm.
3. It adds a condition in generateLinks(String, String, String, Sink) to handle the case where your scm url starts with "scm:svn". While this works as well as the other conditions, I don't think any will work in a mutlimodule situation. The reason is that the scmUrl is suffixed with the artifactId of the module, while the names of the files are all prefixed by the artifactId of the module, so we end up repeating the artifactId twice in the path param of the url to the file in the scm. One of them needs to be removed, but I'm not sure how doing so would affect scm's other than svn.