Never treat attached artifacts as content packages which don't have

[kwin]

extension "zip"

This closes #342

Description

Related Issue

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

• I have signed the Adobe Open Source CLA.
• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[rombert]

Overall LGTM but I am not that deep into Maven plugins. Maybe @cziegeler @karlpauls or @bosschaert know if this is the right fix?

[cziegeler]

this fix should be fine, obviously it would fail if for whatever reason the content package is using a different extension - which sometimes happens, but is very rare.
An alternative would be to ignore artifacts with an extension that has a dot - but that is also not 100% safe.
I think if the exclusion is logged (right classifier, wrong extension) then its easy to identify the problem

[kwin]

In which cases is the extension not zip?

[cziegeler]

I have seen content packages with the extension "jar", with the extension "content-package" - very rare and maybe it does not apply.
Like I said, all good but still it should be clearly logged

[kwin]

I improved logging in 164fd64#diff-7fdd24b8cb05fdf384e46a50c9a4125f5bf3e354b6487d163e5e7a05ac086753R206 now.