On Aug 6, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Brett Porter wrote: > > On 07/08/2010, at 1:22 AM, Brian Fox wrote: > >> I'm not so concerned about confusing users with a beta2 and then a >> beta3, that can be mitigated easily in the announcement. More releases >> won't hurt anyone. >> >> Let those working on it decide what to do and when presented with a >> vote, I'll test, verify and vote accordingly, regardless of if it's >> beta2 with or without Aether/Guice. I would just rather see one >> sooner rather then later. We too often have a tendency of waiting for >> everything to be perfect. They are betas, pick one and stage it I say. > > +1 to that > > Not to extend the thread too much further, but I'd still like to see someone > answer my questions about the impact of changing the project's scope by > moving the artifact implementation to Aether before that lands anyway. We've > had a lot more time to ponder Guice. > > 1) is there any alternative that would keep what we have today - the Maven > implementation and API for Maven plugin developers - within the Maven > project, while still allowing Jason's desire to involve more people in an > expanded effort? >
The current Plugin API is not changed at all. We didn't change any of the plugin code. No impact on plugin developers. A new API is a different story and that will be far more powerful with JSR330 and Aether. No one is going to work on the Maven implementation, that is clear from the sheer lack of neglect over the last 3 years. No one is magically going to start working on this. That much is clear. > 2) either way, what API are we expecting plugin developers to use for > artifact resolution in Maven 3? They can use what exists now. We didn't alter any plugins. I imagine we will have to support the old API forever. > If it is Aether, what is the impact to plugin developers if the interfaces > change after 3.0 Pretty much zero, plugins that exist today run without change. There are a couple gotchas but nothing major. > , or if it moves to Eclipse (or even back to Apache) and changes packaging > again? > Aether is the library, and what should happen to prevent API leakage is that if a new Plugin API is developed that it prevent leakage this time and nothing will be couched in terms of Aether directly. That was a mistake with the current code and with Wagon. What is used now in terms of API we've tried to support to the best of our ability and there's no reason it can't remain indefinitely. Any new JSR330-based API for plugins should attempt to prevent API leakage. > I'm still having trouble understanding the dichotomy between an project > intended to evolve rapidly, and wanting to include that in a project > (hopefully) nearing release which will be used for years. > You do it by maintaining APIs which we have attempted to do. > Thanks, > Brett > > -- > Brett Porter > br...@apache.org > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl --------------------------------------------------------- We know what we are, but know not what we may be. -- Shakespeare
