Am 2020-11-13 um 18:31 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
Hi,
On 12.11.20 20:00, Robert Scholte wrote:
Hi,
It is already several years ago where we started discussing about
Maven Next Generations.
Clearly we needed to work on the pom, because over time we're facing
more and more limitations.
For (Maven) Central the Model 4.0.0 will be required pom format,
there's no discussion about that. So we needed a new architecture
where there's a local pom that is transformed to Model 4.0.0 or where
it can be generated.
With the implementation of MNG-6656 and the improvement with MNG-6957
we've made the first and important steps based on pom transformation.
If this concept proofs itself, we can start thinking about enhancing
the pom model.
When talking about Model 5.0.0 it looked like it would be great to
introduce it for Maven 5. There was even a period where we thought
about skipping Maven 4, just to sync the Model version with the Maven
version.
However, we discovered that this would be a huge change, and that we
would probably need a couple of Maven 4 releases before moving to
Maven 5. Maven 4 would consist of preparation releases.
I've started writing the build/consumer to proof that the it is indeed
possible to separate the local pom from the distributed pom, even
though they both are currently still Model 4.0.0 compatible.
The original idea was:
Maven 3: build/consumer feature disabled by default
Maven 4: build/consumer feature enabled by default
Maven 5: Model 5
We were worried that this wouldn't give us enough feedback.
maven-integration-testing shows that build/consumer does work. There
should be enough trust to enable it by default, it shouldn't impact
existing projects (the last find by Michael was actually great. It
demonstrated the effect when using threads. The fix made sense and
Maven was stable again). But it is simply not enough. We need much
more feedback.
Meanwhile other improvements have been done, that has impact:
- new behavior of reactor commandline arguments
- upgrade of default versions of plugins per packaging type
- requiring Java 8
- Maven wrapper
- there's a PR waiting that will shift the logic of the
ProjectBuilder/ModelBuilder. As this is quite important for more
people to understand, I'll record a Q&A with Maarten+Martin soon and
share it with you.
it would be nice to have a kind of information here on the dev list to
see what kind of consequences this has?
There are probably more, but all these already defend my opinion about
the next Maven version.
To me it is not a Maven 3 anymore, we're reached a point where we
should start calling it Maven 4.
The next release should probably have an alpha suffix, just to give
users the chance to do alpha testing.
With a new major version we start to produce high expectations with 4.X
I would suggest to do 3.7.0 first with support:
- new behavior of reactor commandline arguments(?) ?
- Maven 3: build/consumer feature disabled by default (??)
Needs more testing of corse...
cause this would help a lot of people... make it easier
and get rid of flatten part..
- Signing of artifacts etc. needed to solved first.
- requiring Java 8 (not a big issue; done for several Maven minor
versions before)
- Maven wrapper
getting all that above working fine... and mark a number of classes /
parts/modules as deprecated ... which has not being done yet.
Also I suggest to 3.7.0 instead of 4.0.0 for this cause otherise the
adoption is more hesitant than for a 4.0.0 which is a major version
upgrade....
Maven 4.0.0
- build/consumer feature enabled by default
- Remove old stuff
- break things and improve the build pom ...
- Remove maven-compat .. ? introducing maven-compat3 ?..
- Maybe JDK 11 base? (LTS?) just a thought
-
Also making a 3.7.0 before so we can learn things related to
build-consumer pom before going to Maven 4.0.0 ....where we can break
things which we can not in 3.7.0 ...
Hi Karl,
I don't think that that we should press such an amount of changes into a
minor release. If you want to have a 3.7.0 why not branch off 3.6.3 and
cherry-pick selected changes....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
