For the record, the famous difficulties in testing multi-threaded code
was one of the chief reasons I was hesitant to include the parallel
resolution code. If we can achieve a degree of stability through the RC
process, then fine.
But there is still a difference here between Doxia 1.1 and the parallel
resolution issue: parallel artifact resolution is part of maven core,
and is meant to mature alongside any other new code in time for the
Maven release. Doxia, on the other hand, is separate and more complex to
release in lock-step with other maven core code. As it stands, we
*cannot* cut a release candidate for Maven to start looking at the
stability with both of these modifications, at least in part because
Doxia 1.1 doesn't exist yet.
This is a major issue for me; the Doxia release has been pending for
months now, and only became interesting again when we started pushing
for a Maven core release. That's backward IMO, since a software project
ought to select from the field of available, *released* software for its
dependencies. We've had the Doxia inclusion issue front-and-center in
the 2.1.0 bucket for Maven this whole time, and we keep talking about
releasing it...when can we actually get it started so we can get through
the 72h voting period and get on to Maven release candidates? It's
likely the RC process will take awhile, at least if the last go 'round
is any indication, so it would be good to get on with it. We need a
released version before we can even have an intelligent conversation
about whether it ought to be included in the next Maven release, IMO.
-john
Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi Brian,
2009/3/3 Brian E. Fox <bri...@reply.infinity.nu>:
The more this thread goes on, the less optimistic I feel about this going into
2.1. We already know the 2.1M1 is stable and the point was to get it out in a
release that people can use, ie non-milestone.
I hope that 2.1 is stable but I remember you that Benjamin found a
parallel bug last week [1].
Making radical changes at the last minute is not good for stability
and not good for the users. I think this should go into 2.2 and there
should be a release cut and integrated into the 2.2 snapshots
immediately so we have time to understand the issues. Using a maven
release to effectively test doxia goes against all the progress we've
made in the last year to stabilize the releases and improve quality.
(this is the same argument I think I used in 2.0.9, 2.0.10, and since the
release didn't happen, it's still valid imo)
I don't remember the arguments for 2.0.10 but I have no arguments why
2.1 could not include Doxia 1.1.
Maven 2.1 has new features Doxia too, it is a good combination IMHO.
I guess we will have several RC before launching 2.1, similar to
2.0.10 release.
So let's see what happen if we include Doxia 1.1, we could always do a
revert if problems are found.
Cheers,
Vincent
[1] http://maven.markmail.org/message/st4h4i4hd5zljnf4
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
