Re: release button in project group page.
I think this is because the release plugin is being called at the parent pom once to also release all its modules whereas builds are being called at each project in the project group. On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 3:23 AM, Benoit Decherf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, The release button of the project group page only works if all projects in the group have the same parent and the parent is in the group. Why doesn't it make a release of all projects in the group ? I think that it should work as the build all projects button. Benoit.
Re: release button in project group page.
Yes, but I think that it should release all projects in the group. It's really strange that this button doesn't work as the build all projects button. And it would be a very great feature if it do it. Benoit. Edwin Punzalan wrote: I think this is because the release plugin is being called at the parent pom once to also release all its modules whereas builds are being called at each project in the project group. On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 3:23 AM, Benoit Decherf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, The release button of the project group page only works if all projects in the group have the same parent and the parent is in the group. Why doesn't it make a release of all projects in the group ? I think that it should work as the build all projects button. Benoit.
Re: Confused about the branches
On 29/02/2008, at 10:04 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 29/02/2008, at 9:52 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: why 1.1.x? in case there was a bugfix release on 1.1? I thought that was what the branch was for... maintenance of 1.1. or is there going to be 2 completely different strands of development? I thought to do 1.x in the branch instead of only maintenance in 1.1.xbecause I don't know how many time we'll need for the first 2.0 release. User will probably need some new small feature before the 2.0release and not only maintenance. With the roadmap discussion recently, I thought it was going to be an incremental move towards 2.0 on trunk - 1.2 will have some parts and refactorings, 1.3, 1.4 and so on. I'm not sure why there would need to be two streams of development? I think there's a real danger of getting lost in the 2.0 trap (c.f. Maven 1.0, Maven 2.0 and Maven 2.1 :) I'm actually keen to do a couple of small things myself and get a release out: - a few small bug fixes, like the lost change sets for some builds - better error handling - switch to a Jetty runtime without the plexus appserver so we can use jetty 6 - add a call to svn info --xml to check whether to do an svn update to speed up working copy updates Just stuff I see from running vmbuild and the maven zone. I think that and a couple of other refactorings that are being discussed on here would make a good 1.2 in the next couple of months. WDYT? - Brett -- Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Confused about the branches
Agree on this. Currently there is a blocking issue with xml-rpc CONTINUUM-1590 which prevent using xml-rpc :-(. If no objections, I will change root pom to not have anymore maven pom as parent. -- Olivier 2008/3/4, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 29/02/2008, at 10:04 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 29/02/2008, at 9:52 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: why 1.1.x? in case there was a bugfix release on 1.1? I thought that was what the branch was for... maintenance of 1.1. or is there going to be 2 completely different strands of development? I thought to do 1.x in the branch instead of only maintenance in 1.1.xbecause I don't know how many time we'll need for the first 2.0 release. User will probably need some new small feature before the 2.0release and not only maintenance. With the roadmap discussion recently, I thought it was going to be an incremental move towards 2.0 on trunk - 1.2 will have some parts and refactorings, 1.3, 1.4 and so on. I'm not sure why there would need to be two streams of development? I think there's a real danger of getting lost in the 2.0 trap (c.f. Maven 1.0, Maven 2.0 and Maven 2.1 :) I'm actually keen to do a couple of small things myself and get a release out: - a few small bug fixes, like the lost change sets for some builds - better error handling - switch to a Jetty runtime without the plexus appserver so we can use jetty 6 - add a call to svn info --xml to check whether to do an svn update to speed up working copy updates Just stuff I see from running vmbuild and the maven zone. I think that and a couple of other refactorings that are being discussed on here would make a good 1.2 in the next couple of months. WDYT? - Brett -- Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Confused about the branches
On 04/03/2008, at 10:47 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: Agree on this. Currently there is a blocking issue with xml-rpc CONTINUUM-1590 which prevent using xml-rpc :-(. Cool - shall we just start using the 1.2 bucket in JIRA? There are only 14 issues there now so maybe we could keep that to 20-30 issues all together and release it. I found these changes on trunk that are not on the branch: r617400. (The rest is documentation) I found these changes on the branch that are not on trunk: r627196, r620613, r620612, r620611 I think we should just merge all those from the branch to trunk, set it as v1.2, and close the branch for now? If no objections, I will change root pom to not have anymore maven pom as parent. Sounds good - do you think we should have a Continuum parent POM like we do for Archiva? Cheers, Brett -- Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Confused about the branches
Brett Porter wrote: On 29/02/2008, at 10:04 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 29/02/2008, at 9:52 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: why 1.1.x? in case there was a bugfix release on 1.1? I thought that was what the branch was for... maintenance of 1.1. or is there going to be 2 completely different strands of development? I thought to do 1.x in the branch instead of only maintenance in 1.1.xbecause I don't know how many time we'll need for the first 2.0 release. User will probably need some new small feature before the 2.0release and not only maintenance. With the roadmap discussion recently, I thought it was going to be an incremental move towards 2.0 on trunk - 1.2 will have some parts and refactorings, 1.3, 1.4 and so on. I'm not sure why there would need to be two streams of development? I think there's a real danger of getting lost in the 2.0 trap (c.f. Maven 1.0, Maven 2.0 and Maven 2.1 :) We haven't pegged any version numbers to the tasks extracted from the roadmap discussion. I think we should consider what architecture rework we intend to do (and impact), and if it merits keeping 2 streams (or not). I'm actually keen to do a couple of small things myself and get a release out: - a few small bug fixes, like the lost change sets for some builds - better error handling - switch to a Jetty runtime without the plexus appserver so we can use jetty 6 - add a call to svn info --xml to check whether to do an svn update to speed up working copy updates I agree on getting something out frequently. Having said that if there is a consensus on 2 streams then I think we need to keep the momentum up on both to get releases/milestones out there. Just stuff I see from running vmbuild and the maven zone. I think that and a couple of other refactorings that are being discussed on here would make a good 1.2 in the next couple of months. WDYT? - Brett -- Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ Cheers, Rahul
