You guys decided you wanted to wait so let's just wait. I didn't think it would take this long to get through either but it is what it is. So realistically we're looking at 3.0.4 in 4 weeks.
On Nov 7, 2011, at 9:24 AM, John Casey wrote: > On 11/4/11 7:28 AM, Alexander Kurtakov wrote: >> On 13:04:06 Friday 04 November 2011 Stephen Connolly wrote: >>> On 4 November 2011 10:22, Benjamin Bentmann <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>> David Jencks wrote: >>>>> Another month went by.... any progress? >>>> >>>> The sources were checked into git according to parallel IP, awaiting full >>>> legal approval. Some dependencies still await review [0], too. >>> >>> Any idea what's needed to prod the process along... never having been >>> involved at eclipse before, this seems like a rather long process with >>> no visibility (as far as I can see) as to what is taking place and >>> where the blockers are >> >> Eclipse IP team is going through every single dependency (even test ones) >> and >> checks that they have proper license and so on. And Maven projects tend to >> have so many dependencies that this is only slowing the process. Note that >> different version of e.g. plexus-utils have to be examined separately >> because >> something can sneak in. And a number of plexus artifacts are missing license >> information in a number of places (just an example). >> Please note that this is a problem not only for Eclipse but for others too. >> We >> (Fedora) have opened a number of issues to get licencing clarified in so >> many >> places that I can't count them only for maven+plugins dependencies. >> Another thing is the usage of outdated and obsoleted versions in a number of >> artifacts which have to reviewed separately despite them being dead for long >> time. Btw, this is part of the usual complain that Maven downloads the >> Internet because for certain artifacats usual "clean install" downloads more >> than 5 versions with all of their dependencies. This is certainly a burden >> for >> every IP clearance review. > > If only the review could be distributed, and the dependencies be > published with some sort of signature pre-certifying them. But I guess > that would amount to Eclipse (and others...Fedora?) trusting the > certifications coming from an outside entity. > > It seems a tad wasteful to have multiple entities doing the same thing > in parallel, and it's definitely sub-optimal to have this sort of > bottleneck develop just before a release happens. > >> >> Alexander Kurtakov >> >>> >>>> Benjamin >>>> >>>> >>>> [0] >>>> http://www.eclipse.org/projects/ip_log.php?projectid=technology.aether >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > -- > John Casey > Developer, PMC Chair - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org) > Blog: http://www.johnofalltrades.name/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl ---------------------------------------------------------
