I agree with Robert here, releasing a 1.0 of something we already now know we don't want to continue doesn't sound right to me. Sure, release something to simplify for users, but why not just a alpha-1 or a beta-1? Also stating that the plugin will be discontinued in a near future could be good (although I could argue that this would only cause confusion for the users as the path forward is not yet defined).
/Anders On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 20:56, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote: > Continuing the discussion of MSJ-37. I think should discuss it here. > > To be clear: I'm not against a release. I'm just surprised of the speed to > pull a project it out of the sandbox and push it it to a 1.0, just to have a > non-SNAPSHOT version in Maven Central. > I agree with Christopher here, I don't think we should want > a "god"-javascript-maven-plugin. And maintainig two similar projects > wouldn't be right. > That could mean, that the current JS-project would be released only once, > next it'll retire because it will be replaced by separate plugins. That's > not a 1.0 worth for me. > > But it's no call, just want to share my concerns. > > +1 on releasing and still -1 for 1.0 > > -Robert > > > From: [email protected] > > Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 13:47:59 +1100 > > CC: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] Make a release version of maven javascript plugin > > > > On 08/03/2011, at 1:03 PM, Timothy Astle wrote: > > > > > There was a Maven Java Plugin. =) > > LOL - "was" being significant though. > > > > > I do see your point though. There is a definite need to have some > dependable JavaScript support in Maven that everyone can use. > > Great. > > > > > > > > I'm going to go through the filed issues, as there seem to be people > trying to use the plugin in it's current state. I'd really still like to get > a 1.0 release out and honor the requests made by the current users of the > plugin. I believe that deferring this release is putting some people off > from using Maven for JavaScript development. I'd much rather offer them an > olive leaf than do nothing. > > I think that a better approach would be to fix the issues if you want, > and then look at factoring out the plugins. > > > > > > > > In the meantime, we should probably talk about a way to migrate users > from this plugin to these other JavaScript plugins that you've created. > > I'd like to do this sooner rather than later. Ultimately I think that we > need to deprecate MJS and signal our intentions now. I believe that we > should attain for the same level of functionality factored out into separate > plugins. We're already there with JSLint for example. > > > > > I still have some work to do for the NaturalDocs plugin that's in the > sandbox. Having a newborn really eats up my spare time. =) > > Congratulations! Yes, I know the feeling. > > > > > > > > I hope this appeal makes sense for members of the haus. > > I personally think it is great someone else is taking an interest in > applying Maven for JS development. We just have to do it right though. IMHO > that means taking the same fine-grained plugin approach with JavaScript as > we have with Java. > > > > Kind regards, > > Christopher > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > > >
