Sure, I'll do some more testing and then commit it. Do you have an
opinion regarding naming for this new feature?

See my last comment on the issue:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MVERSIONS-144?focusedCommentId=313386&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-313386

On 2012-11-13 17:32, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> OK, good to know.
> 
> If you are happy to update jira to target MVERSIONS-144 for 2.0 and
> commit it to trunk that would be a help.
> 
> I just want to get off the 2.2.x compat sauce and get over to 3.0 as a
> minimum as there are a lot of bugs that are near impossible to fix
> without being on a consistent dependency resolution API... though
> Hervé's dependency tree component might be able to solve some of those
> issues... I have not checked.
> 
> 
> On 12 November 2012 19:43, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org
> <mailto:denn...@apache.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2012-11-12 13:04, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>     > Dennis,
>     >
>     > The roadmap that I set out for v-m-p only has one issue tagged against
>     > the next release (2.0). That release is to be the last release
>     > supporting Maven 2.2.x. After that the next release is 3.0 which will
>     > require Maven 3.x.
>     >
>     > My intention had been to roll 2.0 and 3.0 fairly quickly after each
>     > other and the previous v-m-p release (1.3 allowing for the JDK 1.4
>     > compat bugfix that was 1.3.1) However, things got in the way and I
>     > didn't get to roll 2.0 in March and 3.0 in April.
>     >
>     > I think 2.0 is good to go... though I should probably cut that
>     > from r15892. If you want to review what has changes since then and see
>     > what is worth pulling into 2.0 perhaps we should stash the current
>     trunk
>     > in a branch and get the 2.0 out the door.
>     >
>     > I will give a week or so before I start preparing to cut 2.0. I
>     can see
>     > value in maintaining a 2.0 branch if somebody else wants to take
>     up the
>     > role of maintainer for that branch after I push it out... just as
>     there
>     > is the option there for anyone who needs Maven 2.0.x compatibility to
>     > maintain the 1.x branch of v-m-p... most likely not seen as an issue
>     > until 2.0 is released.
>     >
>     > -Stephen
> 
>     Hi Stephen
> 
>     My main goal it to get MVERSION-144 into a Maven 2.2 compatible version
>     of the Versions Plugin. I only started looking at other issues because
>     the ITs were failing for me using Maven 2.2.1. I don't see any problems
>     with MVERSION-144 for Maven 2.2.x, do you?
> 
>     I've taken a look at the changes after r15892, and AFAICT there is only
>     a single commit, made by myself, that fixes a typo in Javadoc. So it's
>     safe to say that that change is backwards compatible :) A release of 2.0
>     could be made from trunk as I see it.
> 
>     --
>     Dennis Lundberg
> 
> 


-- 
Dennis Lundberg

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

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply via email to