Hello,
I has been evaluating Maven to start using it to replace our existing Ant
build scripts. To give you a background:
- My work is such that I have multiple projects that I do for multiple
customers but the nature of the project is mostly the same. I basically
customize a base product of
On 7/23/08, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 4:23 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I've wanted to pick up my work on this for some time and was
prodded by the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] threads to
On 7/23/08, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 22-Jul-08, at 8:55 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 4:23 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I've wanted to pick up my work on this for some time and
On 23/07/2008, at 12:03 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Guys,
I re-released 3.0-alpha-1 with my key, manually, no automation :(
Sorry for the inconvenience - I only meant for the artifacts to be
signed again, not re-built :)
Please vote.
tested, checked signatures, checked licenses:
+1
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 1:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Ok,
I have a package for the new 140 version as that's what I'm using but what
they have in central currently doesn't use classifiers which is probably not
so good.
I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with Maven auto-fetching keys,
unless it's working in a web-of-trust mode. How would I verify that the
keys were any good otherwise? It's pretty likely that any compromise
that allowed some one to place a rogue artifact could also add their key
in to
Stephen Connolly wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 1:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Ok,
I have a package for the new 140 version as that's what I'm using
but what they have in central currently doesn't use classifiers
which
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Jörg Schaible
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Connolly wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 1:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Ok,
I have a package for the new 140 version as that's what
Stephen Connolly wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Another prominent use case are ejb-client artifacts. They do
normally not have the same dependencies as the EJB itself.
Is/should that not be more a case of a separate artifact rather than
the same artifact?
So, now can we expect to be blocked by the shade plugin release once
again? This seems wholly unnecessary to me.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: brett
Date: Tue Jul 22 23:49:27 2008
New Revision: 679003
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=679003view=rev
Log:
[MNG-3652] a better unified way
On 24/07/2008, at 12:34 AM, John Casey wrote:
So, now can we expect to be blocked by the shade plugin release once
again? This seems wholly unnecessary to me.
No, it's still pinned to 1.0. (read dev@ mail before commits :)
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
My 2 cents.
While you could probably figure out a way to do this you won't be doing
yourself any favors. One of the strengths of using Maven is having a
common build methodology so that developers can just come in and start
working without learning how your custom build works. For example, I
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of
work on cleaning up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some
PGP tools that he would like to contribute. So overall given the time
he's
+1
On 24/07/2008, at 1:26 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount
of work on cleaning up the project builder in the sandbox, and has
some PGP tools that he would
aye +1
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
On 24/07/2008, at 1:26 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked
on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of work on
cleaning
On 7/23/08, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 22-Jul-08, at 8:55 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 23/07/2008, at 4:23 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I've wanted to pick up my work on this for some time and
+1
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Guys,
I re-released 3.0-alpha-1 with my key, manually, no automation :(
Please vote.
Brett Porter wrote:
Hi Oleg,
Looking at the release, the signatures are from a generic key. While
we're debating that in the other thread, for this release, can you
sign the
+1
Arnaud
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:41 PM, Jesse McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
aye +1
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
On 24/07/2008, at 1:26 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years
+1
- Joakim
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of
work on cleaning up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some
PGP tools that he would like to contribute. So
+1
-Original Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:26 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: [VOTE] Commit privs for Shane Isbell
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new
+1
Oleg
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of
work on cleaning up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some
PGP tools that he would like to contribute. So
+1
--
Olivier
2008/7/23 Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked on
the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of work on cleaning
up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some PGP tools that he would
+1
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's
worked on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of
work on cleaning up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some PGP
tools that he would like to contribute. So overall
+1
--
Wendy
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked on
the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of work on cleaning
up the project builder in the sandbox, and has
+1
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
--
Wendy
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked
on
the new maven-toolchain, has recently done
+1
Milos
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked on
the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of work on cleaning
up the project builder in the sandbox, and has some
Hi,
during some debugging (Maven 2.0.9), I struggled with the expression
${settings.runtimeInfo.file}
returning null (instead of the path to the user settings file). Further
tracking led me to MavenCli.buildSettings() which calls
settings.setRuntimeInfo( createRuntimeInfo( commandLine,
I will be out of the office starting 12.07.2008 and will not return until
28.07.2008.
I will respond to your message when I return. In urgent cases please refer
to Elena Tonoyan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or Daria Ignatieva
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Hello everyone,
Okay, I think we've got all of the problems with RC1 sorted out, and the
integration tests are finally passing again.
So, without further ado, let's get RC2 out there for testing! You can
find the distribution here:
Salut Vincent,
Tiens, tu tiens à utiliser un StringBuffer au lieu de laisser le compilateur
faire le boulot. Je suppose qu'il y a une raison ?
A+
Hervé
Le mardi 22 juillet 2008, vous avez écrit :
Author: vsiveton
Date: Tue Jul 22 04:39:06 2008
New Revision: 678721
URL:
Sorry, wasn't meant for the list...
Now it is on the list, I'll translate (anybody here not speaking french?)
I was asking Vincent the reason to use a StringBuffer and append methods, when
the compiler could automatically do the job. Just to understand and learn a
new trick.
regards,
Hervé
Hi Hervé,
2008/7/23, Hervé BOUTEMY [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sorry, wasn't meant for the list...
Now it is on the list, I'll translate (anybody here not speaking french?)
I was asking Vincent the reason to use a StringBuffer and append methods,
when
the compiler could automatically do the job.
in 2.0.9, i used to beable to do this
execution
id${some.custom.var}/id
Not any more with 2.0.10-RC2
here is the error:
[INFO]
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO]
John,
I've reverted this change. It removed code that was actually part of
the test case (setting the update manager in a known state to test
certain branches of the wagon manager's use of it). Even in the ones
that have no other assertions, the verify() method was ensuring the
update
No doubt this is related to not resolving the contents of the build
section so that plugins like clover could fork and change things. This
might be troublesome.
-Original Message-
From: Dan Tran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:48 PM
To: Maven Developers List
I'm getting stack traces rather than the nice message when an artifact does
not exist the repository...
Downloading:
http://mvn.somedomaindev.co.nz/central/nz/co/somedomain/nz.co.somedomain.parent/14-java4/nz.co.somedomain.parent-14-java4.pom
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:10:40 Michael McCallum wrote:
I'm getting stack traces rather than the nice message when an artifact does
not exist the repository...
For regular maven user you could almost get away with this... but for newbies
its will give them the willies and drive them away getting
Fixed in SVN (you can also see comment on the RC1 thread for the
reason this was occuring).
- Brett
On 24/07/2008, at 1:10 PM, Michael McCallum wrote:
I'm getting stack traces rather than the nice message when an
artifact does
not exist the repository...
Downloading:
Late, but +1.
Emmanuel
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Shane has been been working on NMaven for a couple years now, he's worked
on the new maven-toolchain, has recently done a huge amount of work on
cleaning up the project builder in the
39 matches
Mail list logo
