That would likely be a fix that any organizations providing longer term support would likely backport for their enterprise versions of Jenkins...
On 17 July 2013 10:53, Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> wrote: > Note that to have the fix and be able to use Maven 3.1.0, jenkins users > will have to upgrade which won't be soon for many of them > (Myself I'm using the latest really stable one : the 1.480 LTS) > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Stephen Connolly < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On 17 July 2013 10:09, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 2013/7/17 Olivier Lamy <[email protected]>: > > > > 2013/7/17 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>: > > > >> On 16 July 2013 23:01, Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Until Jenkins gets upgraded to 1.520+ at which point the (crappy > in > > > my > > > >>> > personal view) Maven job type will be unable to run 1.5 > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The crappy one which doesn't work with Maven 3.1.0 too (I tested it > > > this > > > >>> afternoon) > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> I'm sure Olivier will rush to try and defend that job type... > > > > > > > By "defend" I meant that you would go and fix it again! > > > > I am quite happy to keep bashing that job type... been bashing it since > > 2007 BTW and I still haven't stopped having issues with it. For example > all > > our automated internal release builds in CloudBees cannot work with the > > Maven job type and need to be FreeStyle + Maven Build step due to issues > in > > the Maven job type. KK keeps on trying to convince me that some latest > > change or other will redeem the Maven job type... and we spin a week > trying > > to make it work... and we go back to FreeStyle + Maven Build step... > > > > > > > > > > > > I prefer to keep my time to maybe update it to get it working with > > > > 3.1.x rather than waste my time on mailing list discussions. > > > > > > > > > > Apologize if the response looks rude. > > > > > > > I didn't take offence... I was actually trying to say that you would rush > > to fix the job type, so your reply was exactly in line with my > thinking... > > hmmm perhaps my virtual Olivier simulation that I run in my head is not > as > > inaccurate as I suspect most of my simulations are! :-P > > > > > > > I'm probably too upset to not have tested neither take care of that > > > before... > > > > > > First, I agree on the fact the Maven Integration in Jenkins is optimum > > > especially in the case of non backward compat change in maven core. > > > But now we have two options: > > > 1. rewrite that but we have to build a compatibility layer for all > > > plugins using MavenReporter extension point (and maybe having > > > something to move datas to the new model) (probably something to > > > discuss on jenkins-dev@) > > > > > > > Meh! I think there is a better way... but that is because I have a > > different plan whereby people don't want the old integrations > > > > > > > 2. hack the current one to make it working with 3.1.x too > > > > > > Perso, I don't have time for 1 (this can take a bit of time) (but I > > > have some ideas too :-)). > > > So at least we could take care of users and work on 2. (I already did > > > that for 3.0.x so I can again not sure for an other time :-)) (btw > > > thanks again to Hervé for the work on maven plugins!) > > > > > > > Hey I'm fine with you getting the job type fixed... I have enough fun > > trying to duck and avoid support tickets for the job type I *hate*... > > > > ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > Can still keep trucking with a FreeStyle + Maven Build Step > though > > > (and I > > > >>> > prefer that way anyway) > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> <asJenkinsUser> > > > >>> Me too if we backport features from the crappy maven integration > into > > > the > > > >>> freestyle job (automatic dependencies, post build deployment ..). > > > >>> What was done in Hudson was good from my point UI (excepted the GWT > > UI > > > >>> which was ugly) > > > >>> </asJenkinsUser> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> Ahem... there are other ways to skin this cat... but the people who > > know > > > >> have been sworn to secrecy under pain of being shot, hung, drawn and > > > >> quartered before having the entire troupé of Riverdance dance on > their > > > >> grave... so you'll just have to wait a month of so to find out! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Olivier Lamy > > > > Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au > > > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Olivier Lamy > > > Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au > > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > ----- > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >
