Dependabot configuration on Maven core version should be updated to not upgrade so aggressively, IMHO
On 2026/10/09 21:53:26 Sylwester Lachiewicz wrote: > Hi Hervé, > > Thanks, that settles it for me: the compatibility plan entry is the > decision, and 3.9 is the minimum prerequisite. Plugins still declaring > 3.6.3 can move to 3.9.0 with their next release. > > A related point: since several of you said 3.10 is too early, note that > Dependabot is already moving our build baseline there. Since 1 October it > has opened 31 "Bump mavenVersion from 3.9.16 to 3.10.0" PRs in our plugin > and shared repositories; 18 are merged and 13 are open, several of them on > the -3.x branches. For comparison, when 3.9 became the minimum in November > 2025, 3.9.0 was almost three years old and 3.9.10 and 3.9.11 had been out > for months; 3.10.0 is twelve days old, with no bugfix release yet. > > That does not change the prerequisite, but it changes what we compile and > test against: Maven Resolver 1.9.27 -> 2.0.24 and SLF4J 1.7.36 -> 2.0.19. > Code that binds to a method existing only in Resolver 2 compiles cleanly > but fails with NoSuchMethodError for users on 3.9.x, and the unit tests > then cover 3.10 behaviour only. Dependabot also bumps mavenVersion alone, > which creates mixed classpaths: maven-invoker-plugin master now has > mavenVersion 3.10.0 with resolverVersion 1.9.27. > > Regards, > Sylwester > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2026 10:48 PM, Hervé Boutemy <[email protected]> wrote: > > last year, when this line was added to the page, I did not started a new > long discussion, as the move was reasonable. > > > > but if adding a line on this page does not mean a decision, I don't get > what this page means > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Hervé > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2026 10:48 PM, Hervé Boutemy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > last year, when this line was added to the page, I did not started a new > > long discussion, as the move was reasonable. > > > > but if adding a line on this page does not mean a decision, I don't get > > what this page means > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Hervé > > > > On 2026/10/09 11:31:49 Sylwester Lachiewicz wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Thanks for the replies. One point is still open for me. > > > > > > Matthias reads last year's thread as a discussion, not a vote. Hervé, you > > > wrote that 3.9 was "already decided and documented", but the > > compatibility > > > plan has a single line for it, citing the mailing list thread, while the > > > Java 17 entry next to it cites a vote. > > > > > > Can you confirm which it was: a project decision that our plugins should > > > follow, or a discussion whose outcome each plugin applies when it needs > > to? > > > I don't intend to have long side discussions, your answer is enough to > > > close this thread. > > > > > > Sylwester > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
