Remove use/mention of 'compile quarkus:dev'

[maxandersen]

compile quarkus:dev was needed in pre 1.0 Quarkus - time to remove it as not needed.

[quarkus-bot]

/cc @gsmet, @loicmathieu, @yrodiere

[quarkus-bot]

Thanks for your pull request!

The title of your pull request does not follow our editorial rules. Could you have a look?

• title should preferably start with an uppercase character (if it makes sense!)

This message is automatically generated by a bot.

[aloubyansky]

We have to be careful about this. Explicit compile and compile invoked by the DevMojo don't seem to always work in the same way. For single module projects, autocompile will work most of the time, probably.
However, for multi module projects we should be recommending explicit compile when the launch is performed from the root project dir.

[gsmet]

This looks good to me but it will require a squash.

I will let @aloubyansky decide if it's the way to go though. My understanding is that we already recommended using mvn quarkus:dev.

[aloubyansky]

Kind of minor but the logs below are for mvn clean compile quarkus:dev.

[maxandersen]

updated it - interesting to see how more "noisy" our output become in a year ;)

[aloubyansky]

This paragraph is dedicated to multimodule projects and this is where we should mention when explicit compile is recommended. This paragraph is also outdated. Our bootstrap has evolved since those days and is a lot more reliable today. -DnoDeps isn't really required today.

[famod]

+1 on mentioning compile, maybe even test-compile for continuous testing.

PS: Because of a error when using ECJ, I had to resort to specifying an explicit goal, so that devmojo doesn't run those executions on its own (because this is where the error happens).

[gsmet]

@aloubyansky I think it would probably be easier if you added an additional commit on top of @maxandersen 's changes.

[maxandersen]

@famod what's that error you get with each? Got issue link?

@gsmet sorry. GitHub notifications sucks for me. Will touch this up while travelling today.

[maxandersen]

@aloubyansky I've reworked this section to talk about need for explicit compile and removed noDeps mention. Should it be mentioned somewhere else or is noDeps just not relevant to use anymore ?

[aloubyansky]

By default we make as many modules in the workspace reloadable as we can handle (exceptions are extension artifacts, dependencies of extensions, parent-first artifacts and dependencies of parent-first).
noDeps makes only the app root module reloadable.

[maxandersen]

We have to be careful about this. Explicit compile and compile invoked by the DevMojo don't seem to always work in the same way.

"don't seem to" as in the behaviour looks differently to users and thus must use compile for consistency or "don't seem to" as in we don't know why compile is needed but it fixes the issue?

[gsmet]

Could we fix the issues and finalize this? @aloubyansky I think you're the best person to get this done quickly.

[aloubyansky]

@gsmet I think it's ok. It does now mention compile is recommended for multimodule projects.

[rsvoboda]

@maxandersen PR needs update, one conflicting file

[gsmet]

I rebased the PR, it can now be merged once CI is green.

Comments were addressed.

[github-actions]

🙈 The PR is closed and the preview is expired.