Personally I have a problem with a Maven 3.0.5 requirement. The reason is that there are IDEs out there that is based on Maven 3.0.4. Also, IIRC there was just a very minor (code wise) difference between Maven 3.0.5 and 3.0.4, so requiring 3.0.5 (instead of 3.0.4) wouldn't give us much. Having said that, I'm in favor of moving to a Maven 3.0 requirement. And making that a 3.0.4 requirement is fine with me.
/Anders On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Robert, > > from my point of view minimum to 3.0.5 ...nothing below...afterwards > 3.1.1.....and then 3.2.1...the latest releases from the appropriate release > lines 3.0.X, 3.1.X, 3.2.X,.... > > I wouldn't go to 3.1.0 at the moment cause that could be confusing....from > user point of view...than there is a gap... > > 2.2.1 > 3.1.1 > > From my side... > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > > Hi, > >> >> Right now we change the Maven prerequisite to 2.2.1 and I noticed some >> new issues which already want to move it forward to 3.0.4. I wonder why >> to move to this version. >> >> Most (API-)changes have been introduced with the 3.0 alpha and beta >> releases. I don't think that the other 3.0.x releases provide that much >> more changes. >> So I would say that changing the required Maven version would be 3.0. >> *If* we want to force users not to use 3.0.4 due to the CVE-2013-0253, >> we should say that 3.0.5 is the next required version of Maven. >> And I could go one step further: if we want to get rid of the >> compatibility overhead for Aether (Sonatype versus Eclipse) we should >> change it to 3.1.0 >> >> So I'd prefer to move forward to 3.0, maybe even to 3.1.0, but not to >> 3.0.4 unless there are better reasons then I mentioned above. >> >> Any other opinions? >> >> thanks, >> Robert >> > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
