As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether.
I would rather see us use the version number to communicate with the vast number of people who use Maven. So, I'd switch to Eclipse Aether, including the need to fork a few plugins, as 3.2, and use the number 4.0.0 for a version that has real user-visible impact and value. If you presented a long list of wonderful user-visible improvements that would result from the adoption of the new Aether, I'd be happier with your proposal. On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote: > >> A quick answer whilst I let my thoughts dwell on the full long post.. >> >> If we're jumping to a major release here, is this a viable time to also >> update the schema and address of the things we've long been wanting there? ( >> mixins of some form ) - or is this out of scope ( of this discussion at >> least ). >> > > To me it's out of scope. I want to get the API changes out there and signal > the potential of major API breakages. Features can be rolled out whenever. To > me the change in versions is to signal API breakage, not feature addition. > >> Mark >> >> >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without >>> the isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse >>> Aether and suggest an alternate release path. >> > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder & CTO, Sonatype > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > --------------------------------------------------------- > > the course of true love never did run smooth ... > > -- Shakespeare > > > > > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote: > >> A quick answer whilst I let my thoughts dwell on the full long post.. >> >> If we're jumping to a major release here, is this a viable time to also >> update the schema and address of the things we've long been wanting there? ( >> mixins of some form ) - or is this out of scope ( of this discussion at >> least ). >> > > To me it's out of scope. I want to get the API changes out there and signal > the potential of major API breakages. Features can be rolled out whenever. To > me the change in versions is to signal API breakage, not feature addition. > >> Mark >> >> >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without >>> the isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse >>> Aether and suggest an alternate release path. >> > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder & CTO, Sonatype > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > --------------------------------------------------------- > > the course of true love never did run smooth ... > > -- Shakespeare > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
