I didn't said I'd like 1.5 for a 2.2 release, to show the runtime
prerequisite change

2009/4/28 nicolas de loof <[email protected]>

> You've got my +1 for 1.5 upgrade.
> I spent too much time on old JEE appservers with XML parser issues and
> other frustrating runtime constraints, I don't wan to see Maven handle bugs
> with complex workarounds just because some up-to-date dependencies cannot be
> used. So fiew projects are still 1.4 compatible ! I myself updated the GWT
> plugin to 1.5 by claiming GWT uses this API level itslef :p
>
> As a side effect, with migration to 1.5 we could use generics for API
> collections, and avoid newbee (and other) developpers to search by hand what
> project.getArtifacts() returns as type ;)
>
> Nicolas
>
> 2009/4/28 John Casey <[email protected]>
>
>  The problem is, the two http wagons share the same plexus role-hint. This
>> means one will always obscure the other inside the Maven runtime. In any
>> case, MNG-4147 is only the second reason for changing the Maven release
>> version from 2.1.1 to 2.2:
>>
>> 1. MNG-4140: even working around the NoClassDefFoundError for XPath* in
>> JDK 1.4, this means that version expressions won't be interpolated on
>> install/deploy unless JDK 1.5+ is used. This was something we talked about
>> in [1].
>>
>> While catching NoClassDefFoundError seemed like a solution, it will
>> actually regress the behavior for JDK 1.4 users...version-expression
>> interpolation won't happen at all for them.
>>
>>
>> 2. MNG-4147: the aforementioned case where long passwords cause line
>> wrapping in the Authorization header value. This may not be compelling by
>> itself, but leaving both this and the interpolation changes above out makes
>> Maven 2.1.1 a whole lot less attractive IMO.
>>
>>
>> -john
>>
>> [1] http://tinyurl.com/cqcrlp
>>
>>
>> Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:33 PM, John Casey <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  However, there is another issue that I feel is important to address:
>>>> MNG-4147.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have to admit that I find the problem of a "very long password" fairly
>>> exotic.
>>> Apart from that, there should be a possible workaround by explicitly
>>> choosing
>>> the httpclient-based wagon implementation. (This workaround isn't
>>> mentioned
>>> in the issue. Shouldn't it?)
>>>
>>> In summary, I think this is no reason for heavy changes like switching
>>> to 1.5, or
>>> replacing the default Wagon implementation.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jochen
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to