Hi MOJO team,

I would prefer  a voting period even as short as 24 hours, to give
mojo dev a chance to  looking into.  and I dont want outside world
would think MOJO is just dumping ground move artifact to Central. and
finally with a policy in place, it would make the release dev think
twice about cutting the release in in term of quality.

My 2 cents

-D


On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote:
> FYI
>
> Robert
> ________________________________
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:54:53 +0100
> Subject: Re: gwt-maven-plugin releases
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]
>
> [+cc [email protected], there's no
> reason to keep it private]
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> Let me first put things in context:
> - this project is at mojo historically; it was probably the best place at
> the time to get some visibility (and we can probably thank Mojo for that)
> - if I hadn't taken over the leadership, it'd probably be dead now. I took
> the lead because I needed a few things and nobody were taking over from
> ndeloof. Actually I didn't take the lead, I'm only a de facto leader: I'm
> making releases because I need them, and I've been given the authorizations.
> - the project already "broke" the mojo rules before I came to maintain it,
> by moving the sources to github (OK, not completely moving per se, as they
> were sync'd to the svn)
>
> On a day to day basis, maintenance is a pain: the project's code quality &
> design choices (YMMV), having to mirror github to svn from time to time
> (which is still better than using svn or even git-svn), deploying sites to
> codehaus using webdav (even worst that only to update the plugins page I had
> to wait 3 minutes that the upload finishes; 3 minutes only for 4 chars
> removed in one file).
>
> I don't enjoy maintaining this plugin. I do it because it has to be done,
> and I need it to be done.
>
> Furthermore, I'm moving GWT itself to Maven (from Ant) and having a plugin
> in GWT proper seems the logical thing to do going forward. I'm also working
> on a new plugin (from scratch) to that effect. If all goes well, you can
> expect 2.5.0 to be the last release at codehaus, at least by me.
>
> You'd understand then that I don't really mind following the rules.
> Moreover, I strongly believe users of the plugin aren't looking at the mojo
> mailing list to follow the releases, they follow maven-users list, the
> dedicated Google Groups, the GitHub commits and/or me on Twitter or Google+,
> I don't see any value in subscribing to a mailing list just so that I can
> post to it, and will never read it (meaning I won't read replies to the
> things I'd post; such as Anders' post).
>
> Don't take it as an attack or whatever against Mojo. I'm just being
> pragmatic and willfully refusing to "take part in Mojo": it's not my thing,
> I didn't want it, yet it's still better than a fork. In case I need to
> release a 2.5.0-1 or 2.5.1 version of the gwt-maven-plugin, I can already
> tell you that I won't change anything to my procedure (or leave it to
> someone else to follow the mojo rules). If that means the project is no
> longer welcome at mojo, then I'll either leave it or move it elsewhere
> (rather leave it, given that I'm writing a replacement plugin).
>
> Oh, and BTW, there was a vote for 2.5.0-rc2:
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/codehaus-mojo-gwt-maven-plugin-users/ErZsnMIbOp0/discussion
> (and I did put  [email protected] in copy, but as you said, I'm not
> subscribed to any mojo-codehaus list, so it was bounced).
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Le 6 nov. 2012 20:24, "Robert Scholte" <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
> Hello Thomas,
>
> I noticed you released the gwt-maven-plugin recently.
> I was kind of surprised, because I didn't received a call for vote, as we do
> for all mojo releases.
> Anders Hammar already tried to make this clear [1], but it seems like you're
> not subscribed to this list.
> If you're not subscribed to any of the mojo-codehaus lists, it's not
> possible to send announcements to them.
>
> We ask you to follow the release procedures with care next time[2]
> It's not meant to be bureaucratic, but gives the team a change validate the
> plugin.
> I'd like to have feedback on my releases from the team, so no stupid
> mistakes are pushed to Maven Central.
> And I sure hope you do that too.
>
> best regards,
>
> Robert Scholte
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/dkquazoudcecyl3y
> [2] http://mojo.codehaus.org/development/performing-a-release.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply via email to