On 18/03/2009, at 9:51 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 17-Mar-09, at 10:10 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 18/03/2009, at 2:23 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Why are you changing core code in the RC branch after we have
started the RC cycle?
Can we please leave the code alone in RCs and use the 2.1.x branch
for any non-regression related changes.
See the concurrent threads - the change you quoted was an
adjustment to the previous one based on Benjamin's assessment. The
original change was to better inform users of a difference in
compatibility for plugins between 2.0.x and 2.1.0 which is why I
merged it. I also said that if this is the only thing left it can
wait until 2.1.1 - I don't mind if these get rolled back from the
RC branch at all.
Benjamin removed the plugin discovery listener?
No, I made a change to properly report metadata problems to avoid
confusion under an earlier change in 2.1.0 (the thread about the resin
plugin). Benjamin pointed out that the way it was done would run the
checks hundreds of times harmlessly but unnecessarily and suggested
removing the listener after the plugin was loaded, so I did that as
well. Then did the same for the collector as we shouldn't be looking
for mojos in dependencies of the plugin. I beefed up the integration
tests with use cases related to the descriptor and using plugin
dependencies that are plugins themselves, and an additional sanity
check that the inherit-maven-plugin still worked.
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
[email protected]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
