IIRC for maven-assembly-plugin most of the actions have been done as
stated in the migration strategy[1]
Due to not knowing about maven-artifact-transfer the plugin contains some
equivalent code, but the custom code doesn't work for all M3.0+ versions
(I think only 3.0.4 and above).
AFAIK it still uses ArtifactFactory, which means that still the legacy
code is used instead of Aether, meaning it would be Maven3+ in name only.
I'm not convinced that the API of maven-artifact-transfer is ready, but
since this plugin isn't using it, I'm open to go for m-assembly-p 3.0,
although I'd prefer 2.6, because it would be THE moment to remove
deprecated code. For that reason I ask in general: please do a
pre-announcement when going for a plugin 3.0 release, so we can have a
good and critical look at it.
thanks,
Robert
[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Plugin+migration+to+Maven3+dependencies
Op Mon, 05 Oct 2015 16:05:24 +0200 schreef Benson Margulies
<[email protected]>:
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 4:27 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
<[email protected]> wrote:
Personally I'd release 3.0.0 and stuff whatever nit-picky requirements
are not met. Revert any changes that depends on code that is not yet
ready for release. I think ultimately the large list of requirements
is a nice way to just halt all progress.
It'll be at least a jdk 1.6 release no matter what.
My aim is to have the minimum of controversy here. If Robert and the
other laborers on the trunk hate your idea, I'll stick with my idea.
I'd just like to do _something_ this week.
Kristian
2015-10-05 2:47 GMT+02:00 Benson Margulies <[email protected]>:
I have my itch scratched on the 2.6 branch. If anyone else wants to
pull something else onto the branch before I release 2.6.0, please
speak up.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Benson Margulies
<[email protected]> wrote:
OK, will do.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Benson,
just update the branch. I have checked in a fix for that...
You need simply to define Java 6 as target/source otherwise the
parent will
control that which is there by default 1.5...
I would suggest to make 2.6.0 which identifies as JDK
6...requirement....3.0.0 should be reserved for Maven 3.0+ plugins...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
On 10/4/15 11:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
What can I do to help move the 3.0 effort along?
Or, alternatively, what would it take to get a consensus to move to
Java 1.6 for m-a-p 2.6?
I'm stuck on...
The version of plexus I need to get the feature I want requires 1.6,
and the existing code is insisting on 1.5.
[INFO] --- maven-enforcer-plugin:1.3.1:enforce
(enforce-bytecode-version) @ maven-assembly-plugin ---
[INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.5 yet
org.iq80.snappy:snappy:jar:0.3:compile contains
org/iq80/snappy/BufferRecycler.class targeted to JDK 1.6
[INFO] Restricted to JDK 1.5 yet
org.codehaus.plexus:plexus-archiver:jar:3.0.1:compile contains
org/codehaus/plexus/archiver/UnixStat.class targeted to JDK 1.6
[WARNING] Rule 0:
org.apache.maven.plugins.enforcer.EnforceBytecodeVersion failed with
message:
Found Banned Dependency: org.iq80.snappy:snappy:jar:0.3
Found Banned Dependency:
org.codehaus.plexus:plexus-archiver:jar:3.0.1
Use 'mvn dependency:tree' to locate the source of the banned
dependencies.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Benson Margulies
<[email protected]>
wrote:
On Oct 4, 2015 4:08 PM, "Dennis Lundberg" <[email protected]>
wrote:
From what I have read we need to move all of maven-plugins to
git in
one
go.
See the thread "Full migration to Git" for more info
I guess I'll have to go tune into that thread.
2015-10-04 14:07 GMT+02:00 Benson Margulies
<[email protected]>:
OK, then, I want to move it to git first. Any objections?
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi,
On 10/4/15 10:58 AM, Robert Scholte wrote:
Hmm, I see we tried to start with a 3.0.0 version, so not on
the
trunk.
Assembly is far from ready as M3-only, so I suggest branching
the
latest
tag.
Yes that's the way to make a fix release...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
thanks,
Robert
Op Fri, 02 Oct 2015 13:26:18 +0200 schreef Benson Margulies
<[email protected]>:
Could we do this? I'm waiting on the 'snappy' support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
--
Dennis Lundberg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
