The only thing I feel we need to start looking at soon is an xml parser that can deal with newer models and not freak. This is probably related in some way to the refactoring happening in 3.0... but I know that 2.0.x can't handle newer models and the sooner we start moving to a more flexible parser, the easier the eventual migration to 3.0 will be.
I'm not sure this needs to be in 2.1, but maybe on the list for 2.2. -----Original Message----- From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 2:31 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: Maven 2.1.0 GA Plan I've included this as M2 to give us a clean base in M1: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Maven+2.1.0+Release+Plan Let me know what you think. Dennis Lundberg wrote: > John Casey wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> So, it seems that we're all in agreement about the rough outline for >> 2.1.x and beyond. I've renamed the current RC branch to be 2.1.0-M1-RC >> to make this the first milestone toward some as-yet-undetermined feature >> list for 2.1.0. >> >> So, let's talk about that feature list. From earlier comments, I've >> gathered that the following may be good targets to include for 2.1.0: >> >> - Dan's reactor changes >> - Parallel downloads >> - PGP stuff >> - MNG-624 and related issues/feature enhancements (parent versioning, >> right?) >> >> What I don't know is what state of maturity each of these is in, and on >> what timeline they can be stabilized. Do the relevant developers have >> enough time to finish implementing, testing, and documenting each >> feature, so we could get a 2.1.0 GA out in, say 6 weeks or so? Maybe a >> better approach would be to try for a new milestone release that >> contains the final result of each new feature (with latent parts of the >> rest, as we work on them), such that the 2.1.0 GA will contain all the >> new features in their complete forms, with any regressions identified >> fixed and incorporated? >> >> I haven't found the pertinent Confluence pages describing the above >> features yet...maybe they don't exist or maybe I haven't looked hard >> enough yet, but we'll need to collect the list somewhere that we can >> make it public going forward, and then publish that release plan URL on >> the Maven site. >> >> Are there other things that we can fit into this sort of timeframe? Is >> this too much? It's my strong preference that we try to cap this release >> cycle at two months, so I guess this means taking the list of "nearly >> there" features and determining whether we'll have the time to stabilize >> them for inclusion, given our current availability. > > With a timeframe of 2 months I would like to see Doxia beta-1 included > in the core. This is tracked in JIRA as > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3602 > > In the discussions surrounding that issue it was determined there would > not be enough exposure of Doxia beta-1 until the next release (at that > time). But with the new timeframe for the 2.1 release we should be able > to get good testing of Doxia beta-1. > >> Of course, once we settle the 2.1.0 release plan, we can start talking >> about what we're going to do for 2.2, 2.3, etc. As long as we keep >> things rolling, there's no reason anyone needs to feel overly rushed >> about getting a particular feature in a particular release...it should >> NOT be your only chance. :-) >> >> What does anyone else think? >> >> -john >> > > -- John Casey Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org) Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
