My own +1.

Am Sonntag, 2. November 2014 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise :

> Hi,
>
> first to say trying to build surefire with Maven 2.2.1 will fail with a
> circular dependency...problem (as Kristian mentioned)...so best would be to
> require such things not by a README better by prerequisites/enforcer ...
>
> Apart from the README.txt is intended for developers of Surefire and not
> for users of surefire...cause they will on the web site and see Maven 2.2.1
> / JDK 1.4 ....The don't take a look into the release-source package....
>
> The requirement for some plugins at the momment: Maven 3.X
> (maven-shade-plugin, maven-scm-publish-plugin)...is not a problem but the
> compatibility for run-time...Maven 2.2.1 minimum....
>
> The majority of the plugins will currently being lifted to Maven 2.2.1
> minimum which implies Java 1.5 ...which for example for surefire it not the
> case JDK 1.4...at the moment...
>
> See here:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/job/dist-tool-plugin/site/dist-
> tool-prerequisites.html
>
>
> The next level will be Maven 3.0.5 minimum and number the plugins
> accordingly like 3.0 as already mentioned...to have a clear line for
> users...(Maven Site Plugin already does so...)...
>
> Karl Heinz
>
>
> On 11/2/14 6:42 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>
>> For the record, maven2 does not have precise enough dependency
>> resolution to handle the somewhat crazy hoops we jump through to test
>> surefire with surefire itself. So although we're still 2.2.1
>> compatible, we've required 3.x to build for some time.
>>
>> Kristian
>>
>>
>> 2014-11-02 18:18 GMT+01:00 tibor17 <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> Karl, the README.txt will force the users to prepare for Maven 3.
>>> IMHO the SUREFIRE 3.0 would completely switch to Maven 3.
>>> Then we can use prerequisites with enforcer declaring the same min
>>> version
>>> of Maven dist.
>>> We will have chance to use Java Generics instead of using
>>> java.lang.Object
>>> in public API, remove jdk-1.3 and 1.4 profiles, declare surefire|failsafe
>>> property prefixes, use JDK 6 and Java 1.6 API, and break the backwards
>>> compatibility.
>>>
>>> The Java 6 is not maintained by the Oracle. It would be nice to see the
>>> Maven running on the top of Java 8 in the near future. I am not sure if
>>> we
>>> would have any bigger benefits from JDK 7 except for NIO and GC
>>> improvements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> BR, tibor17
>>> --
>>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to