Re: VOTE: Release Apache Maven Changes Plugin Version 2.11 take 1
+1 Regards, Hervé Le mercredi 24 septembre 2014 15:23:12 Mirko Friedenhagen a écrit : Hi, we solved 9 issues: https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11212version=20 323 * [MCHANGES-343] Update maven-reporting-impl to 2.3 * [MCHANGES-342] Removed dependency plexus-container-default:1.0-alpha-9-stable-1 * [MCHANGES-341] Externalize JIRA server timeout values to the configuration section * [MCHANGES-338] Remove redundant anchors set on headings * [MCHANGES-337] Improve language style in model and report generator * [MCHANGES-336] Enum value for type remove is missing * [MCHANGES-334] RestJiraDownloader doesn't honor proxy settings * [MCHANGES-307] Check for whitespace on fixVersionIds and statusIds * [MCHANGES-269] Move anchor location in changes.xml to header There are still 55 issues left: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truepid=11212sta tus=1 Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1068/ https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1068/org/apache/mav en/plugins/maven-changes-plugin/2.11/maven-changes-plugin-2.11-source-releas e.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-changes-plugin-2.11-source-release.zip 728f02f65963a8d5538744aa1aeea0468447dc86 Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-changes-plugin-LATEST/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/tags/maven-changes-plugin-2. 10/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/tags/maven-changes-plugin-2. 11/ Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r1627863 - /maven/plugins/trunk/maven-javadoc-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugin/javadoc/AbstractJavadocMojo.java
My +1, would be great to geht 2.10 with this patch. Regards Mirko -- Sent from my mobile On Sep 26, 2014 11:09 PM, Michael Osipov micha...@apache.org wrote: Am 2014-09-26 um 21:28 schrieb Robert Scholte: Hi Michael, I'm missing action on the wise words from Hervé. Are you planning to add an IT? I have created an IT based off a real project I host on sourceforge. It replicates MJAVADOC-407. If that is fine, I'd like to roll 2.10.1 on Saturday. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: The mess that is symlinks....
I have created http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSHARED-350 http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/PLXUTILS-165 to deal with this. I'm convinced there is only one right thing (tm) to do, so I will do that :) Kristian 2014-09-26 22:26 GMT+02:00 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com: I now have fully working implementations of zip/tar with symlink support. Unfortunately there is a slight mess in current symlink support that needs to be sorted out. Prior to java7, we were only able to (unreliably) detect that a directory was a symlink. Detecting symlink files was impossible. With java7 plus we can detect and handle all kinds of symlinks. I created a test in m-s-u that illustrates the problem, the test structure can be found here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/src/test/resources/symlinks/ Now there is a unit test within the same project that looks like this: - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Maven Javadoc Plugin version 2.10.1
Hi, We solved 3 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11138version=20644 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MJAVADOC%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1069/ http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1069/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-javadoc-plugin/2.10.1/maven-javadoc-plugin-2.10.1-source-release.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-javadoc-plugin-2.10.1-source-release.zip sha1: 991cf644f9ec95a53899ca6a53dba0d14b74799b Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-javadoc-plugin-LATEST/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Javadoc Plugin version 2.10.1
Hi, checked sha1 Ok. Site looks Ok. Tested with Maven 2.2.1, 3.0.5, 3.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3 mvn -Prun-its clean verify without any issue... So +1 from me. Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise On 9/27/14 4:34 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: Hi, We solved 3 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11138version=20644 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MJAVADOC%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1069/ http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1069/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-javadoc-plugin/2.10.1/maven-javadoc-plugin-2.10.1-source-release.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-javadoc-plugin-2.10.1-source-release.zip sha1: 991cf644f9ec95a53899ca6a53dba0d14b74799b Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-javadoc-plugin-LATEST/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
+1 On Sep 27, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@zenior.no wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl http://twitter.com/takari_io - Be not afraid of growing slowly, be only afraid of standing still. -- Chinese Proverb
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) I would favor the move to Java 1.7 if we make strong use of NIO2 for file operations. A lot of pain should go away. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Agree. 1.7 makes more sense at this point. On September 27, 2014 1:41:31 PM EDT, Michael Osipov 1983-01...@gmx.net wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) I would favor the move to Java 1.7 if we make strong use of NIO2 for file operations. A lot of pain should go away. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Let's use the [discuss] thread constructively then; do we call a [VOTE] to move *everything* to 1.7 ? I think we are ready to move to 1.6 without actually having a vote, so if you for some reason oppose the move to 1.6 please say so in the discuss thread or I will simply conclude that we move everything to 1.6 once everyone has had their say. For the scope of this discussion I think it's safe to assume that anyone calling for 1.7 *also* accepts 1.6. Kristian 2014-09-27 19:46 GMT+02:00 Igor Fedorenko i...@ifedorenko.com: Agree. 1.7 makes more sense at this point. On September 27, 2014 1:41:31 PM EDT, Michael Osipov 1983-01...@gmx.net wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) I would favor the move to Java 1.7 if we make strong use of NIO2 for file operations. A lot of pain should go away. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Hi Kristian, On 9/27/14 7:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. As far as i know starting with Maven 3.2.1...was the first one... Time to move everything else as well ? We have at the moment a large number of plugins which have minimum Maven 2.2.1 (JDK 1.5)...and few are currently at Maven 2.0.6 (that's only for a limited amount of time) The next round should be to lift up to Maven 3.0.5 at minimum which implies to left Maven 2 finally behind. Making it visible to people by using 3.X versions for the plugins or something similar... ...afterwards i see the next round to lift up to Maven 3.1.1... and after that i see the next lift up to Maven 3.2.1 which implies Java 1.6...and so on It's a longer way...which takes time... Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) If we go the above path it's of course longer but more consistence from the user point of view...using Maven 3.0.5 which works with Java 1.5 ...and the plugins as well...etc... Of course from the technical point of view it's not that good ;-(... So from my site i would vote with +0 ... Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[GitHub] maven-surefire pull request: Avoid invalid link ids in surefire-re...
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/36 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
1.6 is fine by me. Working actively with a customer using IBM's JDK 1.6, which is still supported by IBM, will make me vote -1 on a move to 1.7 currently. /Anders On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise khmarba...@gmx.de wrote: Hi Kristian, On 9/27/14 7:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. As far as i know starting with Maven 3.2.1...was the first one... Time to move everything else as well ? We have at the moment a large number of plugins which have minimum Maven 2.2.1 (JDK 1.5)...and few are currently at Maven 2.0.6 (that's only for a limited amount of time) The next round should be to lift up to Maven 3.0.5 at minimum which implies to left Maven 2 finally behind. Making it visible to people by using 3.X versions for the plugins or something similar... ...afterwards i see the next round to lift up to Maven 3.1.1... and after that i see the next lift up to Maven 3.2.1 which implies Java 1.6...and so on It's a longer way...which takes time... Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) If we go the above path it's of course longer but more consistence from the user point of view...using Maven 3.0.5 which works with Java 1.5 ...and the plugins as well...etc... Of course from the technical point of view it's not that good ;-(... So from my site i would vote with +0 ... Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Karl; I think you are mixing concerns somewhat -making things a little more complex than they need to be. I would propose that most people using 2.2.1 are not doing so due to the java version, but simply because they have not ported their build to 3.X due to a bag of different constraints, java version being only one of them. So most users would be able to run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.6. And they can still run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.5, they'll just be missing the upgrades. This is the cost of running old software, and the industry as a whole is making running legacy versions cumbersome/costly. But I think coupling java version - maven version like you're doing is basically flawed; for most users this is not about java versions. Kristian 2014-09-27 20:01 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise khmarba...@gmx.de: Hi Kristian, On 9/27/14 7:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. As far as i know starting with Maven 3.2.1...was the first one... Time to move everything else as well ? We have at the moment a large number of plugins which have minimum Maven 2.2.1 (JDK 1.5)...and few are currently at Maven 2.0.6 (that's only for a limited amount of time) The next round should be to lift up to Maven 3.0.5 at minimum which implies to left Maven 2 finally behind. Making it visible to people by using 3.X versions for the plugins or something similar... ...afterwards i see the next round to lift up to Maven 3.1.1... and after that i see the next lift up to Maven 3.2.1 which implies Java 1.6...and so on It's a longer way...which takes time... Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) If we go the above path it's of course longer but more consistence from the user point of view...using Maven 3.0.5 which works with Java 1.5 ...and the plugins as well...etc... Of course from the technical point of view it's not that good ;-(... So from my site i would vote with +0 ... Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Michael; we are heavily into jdk7 file-system related features, most of which is covered by feature detection/jdk detection. Plexus requires 1.7 to build but still supports 1.5. I'll split a bottle of champagne the day we can drop 1.5/1.6 support from plexus and various utility projects with reflection, it's a disaster. 2014-09-27 19:41 GMT+02:00 Michael Osipov 1983-01...@gmx.net: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. Time to move everything else as well ? Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) I would favor the move to Java 1.7 if we make strong use of NIO2 for file operations. A lot of pain should go away. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Hi Kristian, Karl; I think you are mixing concerns somewhat -making things a little more complex than they need to be. I think it is not that simple... I would propose that most people using 2.2.1 are not doing so due to the java version, but simply because they have not ported their build to 3.X due to a bag of different constraints, java version being only one of them. some people do and some don't...but this is an other story So most users would be able to run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.6. And they can still run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.5, they'll just be missing the upgrades. I'm with you. This is the cost of running old software, and the industry as a whole is making running legacy versions cumbersome/costly. really true...But the problem is that migration takes time/money.. But I think coupling java version - maven version like you're doing is basically flawed; for most users this is not about java versions. It's a point of view...as i mentioned...consistency... You are right that i'm coupling this...if it's flawed...it depends... The java versions are the most cases where an update takes much longer than you think...i have customers which are running on Java 1.5 and Java 1.6 (IBM based as Anders...1.6 +1...)... I have written down my thoughtsbut of course we can go a different way...i just wanted to give my thought and to reconsider things like this...for a further decision... 1.6 might be a good alternative...to go with... Kristian 2014-09-27 20:01 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise khmarba...@gmx.de: Hi Kristian, On 9/27/14 7:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. As far as i know starting with Maven 3.2.1...was the first one... Time to move everything else as well ? We have at the moment a large number of plugins which have minimum Maven 2.2.1 (JDK 1.5)...and few are currently at Maven 2.0.6 (that's only for a limited amount of time) The next round should be to lift up to Maven 3.0.5 at minimum which implies to left Maven 2 finally behind. Making it visible to people by using 3.X versions for the plugins or something similar... ...afterwards i see the next round to lift up to Maven 3.1.1... and after that i see the next lift up to Maven 3.2.1 which implies Java 1.6...and so on It's a longer way...which takes time... Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) If we go the above path it's of course longer but more consistence from the user point of view...using Maven 3.0.5 which works with Java 1.5 ...and the plugins as well...etc... Of course from the technical point of view it's not that good ;-(... So from my site i would vote with +0 ... Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
Yeah Karl, I think you're right :) Things aren't always that easy so we tend to err in favor of being conservative, which I think is ok. Personally I think all java versions 1.8 are a drag right now. So I think we call a straight vote for 1.6 for everything. Although not very ambitious, it moves us one step forward. In another 6 months we do 1 more step forwards :) We'll keep this thread open until monday and then call a vote. Kristian 2014-09-27 20:56 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise khmarba...@gmx.de: Hi Kristian, Karl; I think you are mixing concerns somewhat -making things a little more complex than they need to be. I think it is not that simple... I would propose that most people using 2.2.1 are not doing so due to the java version, but simply because they have not ported their build to 3.X due to a bag of different constraints, java version being only one of them. some people do and some don't...but this is an other story So most users would be able to run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.6. And they can still run 2.2.1 with jdk 1.5, they'll just be missing the upgrades. I'm with you. This is the cost of running old software, and the industry as a whole is making running legacy versions cumbersome/costly. really true...But the problem is that migration takes time/money.. But I think coupling java version - maven version like you're doing is basically flawed; for most users this is not about java versions. It's a point of view...as i mentioned...consistency... You are right that i'm coupling this...if it's flawed...it depends... The java versions are the most cases where an update takes much longer than you think...i have customers which are running on Java 1.5 and Java 1.6 (IBM based as Anders...1.6 +1...)... I have written down my thoughtsbut of course we can go a different way...i just wanted to give my thought and to reconsider things like this...for a further decision... 1.6 might be a good alternative...to go with... Kristian 2014-09-27 20:01 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise khmarba...@gmx.de: Hi Kristian, On 9/27/14 7:23 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: We moved core to 1.6 some time ago. As far as i know starting with Maven 3.2.1...was the first one... Time to move everything else as well ? We have at the moment a large number of plugins which have minimum Maven 2.2.1 (JDK 1.5)...and few are currently at Maven 2.0.6 (that's only for a limited amount of time) The next round should be to lift up to Maven 3.0.5 at minimum which implies to left Maven 2 finally behind. Making it visible to people by using 3.X versions for the plugins or something similar... ...afterwards i see the next round to lift up to Maven 3.1.1... and after that i see the next lift up to Maven 3.2.1 which implies Java 1.6...and so on It's a longer way...which takes time... Kristian (Who's ready to say 1.7 but we stop by 1.6 first :) If we go the above path it's of course longer but more consistence from the user point of view...using Maven 3.0.5 which works with Java 1.5 ...and the plugins as well...etc... Of course from the technical point of view it's not that good ;-(... So from my site i would vote with +0 ... Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[RESULT] VOTE: Release Apache Maven Changes Plugin Version 2.11 take 1
The vote has passed: +1 binding by Hervé, Karl-Heinz and Robert +1 non-binding by me :-) I will proceed tomorrow with releasing. Regards Mirko -- http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com/ https://github.com/mfriedenhagen/ (http://osrc.dfm.io/mfriedenhagen) https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/ On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote: +1 Regards, Hervé Le mercredi 24 septembre 2014 15:23:12 Mirko Friedenhagen a écrit : Hi, we solved 9 issues: https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11212version=20 323 * [MCHANGES-343] Update maven-reporting-impl to 2.3 * [MCHANGES-342] Removed dependency plexus-container-default:1.0-alpha-9-stable-1 * [MCHANGES-341] Externalize JIRA server timeout values to the configuration section * [MCHANGES-338] Remove redundant anchors set on headings * [MCHANGES-337] Improve language style in model and report generator * [MCHANGES-336] Enum value for type remove is missing * [MCHANGES-334] RestJiraDownloader doesn't honor proxy settings * [MCHANGES-307] Check for whitespace on fixVersionIds and statusIds * [MCHANGES-269] Move anchor location in changes.xml to header There are still 55 issues left: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truepid=11212sta tus=1 Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1068/ https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1068/org/apache/mav en/plugins/maven-changes-plugin/2.11/maven-changes-plugin-2.11-source-releas e.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-changes-plugin-2.11-source-release.zip 728f02f65963a8d5538744aa1aeea0468447dc86 Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-changes-plugin-LATEST/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/tags/maven-changes-plugin-2. 10/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/tags/maven-changes-plugin-2. 11/ Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r1628003 - /maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml
Hi, I wonder if this does what we want to achieve: forcing projects using maven-shared-utils to be executed with at least Maven 2.2.1. Right now it is just the preferred version, no problem if the project itself redefines it to 2.0.9 for instance. Is that a problem or should we say [2.2.1,) ? thanks, Robert Op Sat, 27 Sep 2014 22:30:03 +0200 schreef khmarba...@apache.org: Author: khmarbaise Date: Sat Sep 27 20:30:03 2014 New Revision: 1628003 URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1628003 Log: [MSHARED-359] - Upgrade to Maven 2.2.1 build and compatibility. Modified: maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml Modified: maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml?rev=1628003r1=1628002r2=1628003view=diff == --- maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml (original) +++ maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-utils/pom.xml Sat Sep 27 20:30:03 2014 @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ /distributionManagement properties -mavenVersion2.1.0/mavenVersion +mavenVersion2.2.1/mavenVersion /properties dependencies - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Move everything to 1.6
On 28 Sep 2014, at 7:27, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: But I think coupling java version - maven version like you're doing is basically flawed; for most users this is not about java versions. With this - I think further promotion and support of the maven-toolchains-plugin might be handy. The JVM used to -run- maven doesn't need to be the one used to -compile- your applications. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
