Ralph Goers wrote:
I'm really confused. Why is stuff going into 2.2.0 when 2.1.0 hasn't
even been finished. If the mercury wagon provider has improvements
and doesn't impact users why shouldn't it be added to the 2.1.0 roadmap?
I don't have any problem with that. Will try it with 2.1.x branch and
track in http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MERCURY-12
When it passes ITs, I'll add it to 2.1.x roadmap, if there are no
objections?
Thanks,
Oleg
I'm also wondering why the enhancement I did to fix MNG-624 can't go
into M2 instead of waiting for M6 as the current roadmap suggests.
Ralph
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
To clarify: mercury wagon provider as a handler for
http/htps/dav/davs passes
(http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MERCURY-11) all the ITs in
2.2.0-M1-SNAPHOT branch, and I pretty confident it will pass them in
any branch.
I am finalizing CI/bootstrap aspects of the builds.
Thanks,
Oleg
John Casey wrote:
http://www.nabble.com/WebDAV-deploying-bug-with-Maven-2.1.0-M1-to19673500.html
Admittedly, not a real healthy discussion, but IMO it might be
worthwhile to discuss. The jackrabbit implementation is new as of
1.0-beta-3 (really beta-4, since beta-3 is badly broken), and
mercury has been under a LOT of development lately, and I know folks
are putting quite a bit of effort into testing and documenting
it...so it seems like it might be a better way to go.
We have to fix MDEPLOY-85, and that means at a minimum a new release
of wagon-webdav-jackrabbit...at that point, we have an opportunity
to make a decision about which webdav to use.
BTW, we should also talk about a "pointer" wagon-webdav project that
could simply house a relocation section that points to the current
preferred wagon webDAV impl artifactId. This is a bit of a problem
in beta-4, according to some people I've talked to, since the old
wagon-webdav is no longer available.
-j
---
John Casey
Developer and PMC Member, Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp
Ralph Goers wrote:
I don't recall seeing a discussion on jackrabbit vs mercury. Do you
have a link?
John Casey wrote:
I'm stuck in assembly-plugin mode for the moment, but if you want
to move forward with it, go ahead. FWIW, we also need to put the
2.1 release plan to a vote, particularly given the little bit of
discussion we've had over jackrabbit vs. mercury.
...all things I haven't had time to clear off my to-do list for
the last week or two.
-john
---
John Casey
Developer and PMC Member, Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp
Brett Porter wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone opposed to moving forward with a (likely much shorter)
2.0.10 release cycle with what is already on the branch now?
Was anyone already planning to do this?
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
