On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> As for the solution of creating a 2.x branch, that's fine. I don't >> really see much difference between your solution and mine, given that >> you basically admit that not much work will be performed on it. Kill >> it outright, or let it bit rot, either way.. Let's just move forward >> with Maven 3.x and Java 1.6.x. > > I'd rather focus on our agreement than our disagreement. Some complex > ball-o-hair that avoids a branch is worse than a branch. > > The net effect is that anyone with an itch to maintain the 2.x branch > can maintain the 2.x branch. > > Note that Mark S has strong feelings that the necessary wiring to > Aether should be carefully contained in the maven component that plugs > in Aether, rather than having Aether calls directly in something like > the m-d-p.
Have we got there yet? I've got an itch somewhere else that needs dependency resolution and I'd rather call the maven component that does that than hack/roll my own. But I'm time poor enough as it is so can't justify building the dependency resolution stuff if its not yet isolated. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
