+1 Simon, moreover I suppose that we can start vote ;)
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 13:32, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: > upgrade early upgrade often :-) > > > 2010/11/11 Fabrice Bellingard <[email protected]>: > > +1 as well for using the trunk for the maven 3 version of the plugin > > > > Regarding the second point, you gotta have faith in Maven 3 for the > release > > just like Olivier has faith in Sonar for its production environment > upgrades > > ;-) > > > > > > - Fabrice > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Simon Brandhof < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi there, > >> At least Sonar is ready to support Maven 3. Unfortunately compatibility > >> with Maven 2 is not possible in the same mojo version due to dependency > on > >> maven3 API. That's why there are currently two svn branches : > >> > >> trunk/mojo/sonar-mave-plugin is for maven 2, versions are 1.x. Last > >> release is 1.0-beta-2. > >> branches/sonar-maven-plugin-mvn-3.x is for maven 3, versions are 2.x. > The > >> first release will be 2.0-beta-1. > >> > >> Now I'd like to release the branch for Maven 3. My questions are : > >> > >> the maven 2 version is stable and will probably not be released again. > For > >> this reason I think it would be better to use trunk for the maven 3 > version. > >> Any opinion ? Releasing a final 1.0 version should be good too. > >> it's probably the first mojo which requires to be built with maven 3. Is > >> it a problem for the release (nexus staging, webdav deployment) ? > >> > >> Thanks > >> Simon > > > > > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > http://twitter.com/olamy > http://www.linkedin.com/in/olamy > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > -- Best regards, Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru> http://twitter.com/_godin_
