> Also I don't think that using "tag" to convey a git branch is a good plan...
> put perhaps setting it for the releases and clearing after would be a "good thing" I'm not sure where ScmTag get it's info from. But I used this excessively in maven-scm-providers-git. Guess this hasn't changed yet. And I really think this is the correct way of getting the info. That SVN needs to change the URL in addition is really a speciality of SVN and for sure not a common feature of SCMs. LieGrue, strub >________________________________ > From: Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> >To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]>; Mark Struberg ><[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 2:04 PM >Subject: Re: Scm, Surefire, Wagon migrate to git (please check) [was Plan for >git migration] > > >On 21 September 2012 13:00, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > >If I remember correctly the <scm> section has also a <tag> element. >> >> > > >I have not seen anything other than CVS using the tag.... but that could just >be ignorance on everyones part ;-) > > >Also I don't think that using "tag" to convey a git branch is a good plan... >put perhaps setting it for the releases and clearing after would be a "good >thing" > >This stuff was initially used for CVS which is pretty similar to GIT from a >user pov when it comes to branches and tags. >> >>It has not been used for a long time though and I'm not sure if some SVN >>'fixes' (dynamic url change, anyone?) crashed the other behaviour ;) >> >> >> >>LieGrue, >>strub >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> >>> To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]> >>> Cc: >> >>> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 1:51 PM >>> Subject: Re: Scm, Surefire, Wagon migrate to git (please check) [was Plan >>> for git migration] >>> >> >>> On 21 September 2012 12:01, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY >>> <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Le jeudi 20 septembre 2012 11:03:54 Benson Margulies a écrit : >>>> >> > The doco is generated by the release. The release is tagged. >>> The links >>>> >> > point to the tag. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > It is as it should be; it makes perfect sense. >>>> >> >>>> >> There are (potentially) two parts to the SCM page. One says, >>> "where >>>> >> will you find this release in SCM." The other says, "If >>> you want to >>>> >> join the development community, here's what you check >>> out" >>>> >> >>>> >> What I want is for the output of MPIR to clearly and distinctly >>> set out >>>> >> both. >>>> > >>>> > yes, both informations are useful >>>> > probably a new feature to add to next MPIR release: I don't know >>> if this >>>> will >>>> > be easy to code, but let's start with a "new feature" >>> Jira issue, no? >>>> >>>> We've been here before. There's not enough information in the POM; >>> and >>>> fixing that would require 'POM 5'. >>>> >>>> I suppose it could be put in the mpir plugin config as a stopgap. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> With GIT SCM urls though, my understanding is that the branch/tag is not >>> encoded so the question is moot... but it does raise a side question which >>> is how do we get the branch/tag information to be part of the report >>> >>> >>>> > >>>> > Regards, >>>> > >>>> > Hervé >>>> > >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > 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] >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
