Hi, Thanks for hard work on doxia.
We have already discussed about versions for Maven core plugins. So we can try again about it ... the most important question is - should we map Maven API version in plugin version ...? But I will try in a separate thread. I think that we should provide a new site plugin and Doxia 2.0 for Maven 3.x In the current version we have many transitive dependencies with reported security issues - for some users it is important. I have a question about migration (maybe I'm a lazy to figure out it by myself) Can we mix in one project m-site-p 4.x with reports depends on doxia 1.x and doxia 2.x We can provide needed upgrades for reports maintained by the Maven team But I'm afraid that there will be some 3rd party reports that will depend on doxia 1.x How users can manage it? pon., 24 cze 2024 o 17:03 Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> napisał(a): > Guys, > > I am very close to complete ongoing effort for the Maven Doxia 2.0.0 stack > upgrade throughout our codebase. > > Please review the following e-mail I'd like to send out to users@ and dev@ > (CC) for the public: > https://gist.github.com/michael-o/93b9cece8e10939a45b083bc1af7bcfe/edit > > Open questions from my side: > * Is timeline OK? Not too long or too short? > * What is missing? > * What upgraded versions of the plugins should I use? I thought next > major, but that seems to conflict with the 3 for 3 and 4 for 4 approach? > * Should Maven Site Plugin remain at 4 in that regard or should I move to > a new minor and gnodet@ will move the master to Maven 4 API? > > I'll leave you at least a week to discuss until I send this announcement > next week or so. > > Waiting for your input, > > Michael > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sławomir Jaranowski
