Thanks for the info! I guess that by "refactoring" you also imply API changes? If so... should we expect major changes from alpha-2?
So sorry I will miss Eclipse Con. If you ever come to Europe, let me know (we couldn't meet on Eclipse Summit Europe). Being an eclipse project means doing the license work, so it is never premature :-) . Jason van Zyl-5 wrote: > > > On 24-Feb-09, at 11:50 AM, Abel Muiño wrote: > >> >> >> >> Jason van Zyl-5 wrote: >>> >>> What will happen is that when we get close to a beta, many of the >>> dependencies will boil out, and once things are thoroughly tested >>> we'll have the versions we need. >>> >> >> Can you provide an overview of the plans? Which dependencies are being >> considered for removal? Which ones might be added? >> > > We actually don't know until the round of refactoring that's going to > happen starting next week. Myself, Benjamin, John, Oleg, and Shane > will be doing the lion's share of the refactoring in the project > builder, plugin manager, lifecycle executor and the repository system > so we don't know what exactly will work as expected and how that will > effect changes in plexus. > > I'll be posting shortly about a dev meetup around EclipseCon where > myself, Oleg and Shane will be giving some presentations on the core > architecture for the primary components to try and get people > involved, but until then we're just going to be working full tilt to > make 3.x a replacement for 2.x. Until we're finished I don't know what > the core will look like exactly and doing any license work before that > would be premature. > >> This would come handy for any early adopter, like it is our case. >> >> >> Jason van Zyl-5 wrote: >>> >>> I have no problems making CQs for the >>> dependencies are needed. >>> >> >> Submitting CQs is not the problem. You could save months if >> dependencies are >> already approved, since you will skip full IP review (something that >> takes >> months). And you can not release an 1.0 version at Eclipse without >> full >> review. >> >> >> Jason van Zyl-5 wrote: >>> >>> I have a tool to automate >>> the submission of CQs so this is not going to be a burden for me. >>> >> >> I'm trying to propose something that works for everyone, not "you" >> or "me". >> As you probably know, the Eclipse Buckminster project is also >> interested, so >> with just settling on a few versions, maven developers can help a >> community >> of adopters. >> >> >> >> ----- >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/amuino Abel Muiño Vizcaino - >> http://ramblingabout.wordpress.com http://ramblingabout.wordpress.com >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Alignment-of-maven-3.0-dependencies-and-Eclipse-IP-approved-libraries-tp22187681p22189191.html >> Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > the course of true love never did run smooth ... > > -- Shakespeare > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > ----- http://www.linkedin.com/in/amuino Abel Muiño Vizcaino - http://ramblingabout.wordpress.com http://ramblingabout.wordpress.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Alignment-of-maven-3.0-dependencies-and-Eclipse-IP-approved-libraries-tp22187681p22189978.html Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
