The changes to wagon are ... (just to make sure they show in john's gmail account)
1) Timeouts 2) Streaming Wagon 3) Limited Transactions - Joakim John Casey wrote: > Hi all, > > I have something to point out that I think the entire Maven development > community needs to hear. I've been doing a lot of work recently with > Maven > trunk, so I notice any (perhaps inevitable) instability that comes > down the > pike from dependency APIs. Recently, I've been having a LOT of trouble in > this area. > > Particularly in the Wagon API. It seems that a change was rolled into > wagon-provider-api around the beginning of February that introduced > some new > methods into the Wagon interface. This is not in itself a problem, even > though the current code version is at 1.0-*beta*-3-SNAPSHOT. What > causes an > issue is the fact that these new methods are then assumed to be in > place by > the new DefaultWagonManager, effectively breaking that manager's backward > compatibility with previous releases of Wagon providers. > > I tracked all of this down over the course of the past few days, in > between > doing the things that I'm actually focused on doing. I can fix this one > problem by myself; I'm not pleading for help here. However, I cannot > act as > the gatekeeper for all APIs that get used in Maven trunk, to ensure their > stability and backward compatibility. I've been informed that there > are many > other such changes heading for Wagon...interestingly enough, a quick > search > of my GMail account doesn't turn up any discussion of these changes > (unless > it's buried in the deep past somewhere). > > I know that this email can look a bit hypocritical on its face, but I > really > do feel that we owe it to our user base to be a little more proactive in > ensuring backward compatibility than we have in the past. I understand > that > many Maven developers are on various deadlines, but those deadlines do > not > originate in the Maven ASF project, and shouldn't cause undue harm to the > community or its code. I'm not trying to say we need to rigidly adopt and > conform to some process or other, but we each individually need to take > responsibility for discussing and testing any major changes we plan to > put > into Maven or its dependencies. > > IMHO, pushing new features into a beta API is irresponsible unless you > can > be ABSOLUTELY certain it will not impact backward compatibility. In these > cases, it is my understanding that the normal practice is to create a > final > release of the existing API, and then push these bigger changes into the > next version. > > If there's even a shadow of doubt about what effect a change will have on > the user community, we need to make a serious effort to start a > discussion > about it on this list. > > > Regards, > > John > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
