At least, here's my +1, yes.
2013/3/21 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> > Well not suggesting *codehaus* abandon it. Just that we set up a JaaS for > the mojo project > > > On Thursday, 21 March 2013, Baptiste MATHUS wrote: > >> Sure, I personnally know Jenkins a lot better and sure would be more >> comfortable with it. >> But I also like JIRA and don't know if atlassian would be happy with us >> ditching bamboo in favor of Jenkins. >> >> Cheers >> >> >> 2013/3/20 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> >> >> Do we want a Jenkins at CloudBees? Might be easier for people to grok? >> >> >> On Tuesday, 19 March 2013, Robert Scholte wrote: >> >> Let me go through all the jobs. >> It looks to me something has changed, because I'm pretty sure I >> configured notifications for failed builds and first successful to all >> committers (users who have committed to the build) for every mojo job. >> >> No real need to keep checking Bamboo as long as its green ;) >> >> Robert >> >> >> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:57:52 +0100, Baptiste MATHUS <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> FYI, I just committed the corresponding fix/evolution. CI is now back to >> green (thanks Mirko for noticing it, I'll watch it better next time). >> >> I'm gonna launch the 3rd try :-). >> >> Thanks >> >> >> 2013/3/17 Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> >> >> I'm in favor to have just a warning. >> It's enough >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Baptiste MATHUS <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> >> Yup, I was just copying the code ;-). Thanks. >> >> Btw, I'm gonna just display a warning. But if you feel we should fail the >> build, just let me know. >> I feel this might be counter-productive to fail the build for that. >> People might in fact allow running 2.x and 3.x versions of maven on the >> same build, and failing here even if there's actually no cycle might make >> them just remove that rule (banCircularDependencies). >> >> >> >> 2013/3/17 Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> >> >> The RequireMavenVersion Rule may help ? >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/maven/enforcer/trunk/** >> enforcer-rules/src/main/java/**org/apache/maven/plugins/** >> enforcer/RequireMavenVersion.**java<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/enforcer/trunk/enforcer-rules/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugins/enforcer/RequireMavenVersion.java> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Baptiste MATHUS <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> >> OK, I'll go that way. >> If anyone sees this message just now and knows *the right way to check >> the maven version in use in an enforcer rule, I'm interested.* >> >> Thanks >> >> >> 2013/3/17 Mirko Friedenhagen <[email protected]> >> >> I would prefer solution 1 and just document this behaviour (and set >> the Bamboo job to Maven 3). Otherwise you will have this switch in code, >> you should introduce two ITs, one with a failure status on Maven 3 and one >> with a skipped message on Maven 2. >> >> Honestly, new feature, new Maven should be no problem. >> >> Regards Mirko >> -- >> Sent from my mobile >> On Mar 16, 2013 10:42 PM, "Baptiste MATHUS" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> In the circular IT, there's a circular dependency (now that's some >> news!). >> >> But M2 just ignores it silently, not M3. I think we hit >> http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MNG-1944<http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-1944> >> >> So, here we have an choice: either we >> 1) explicitly state (and check during execution?) that this rule can >> only be useful with M3 or >> 2) we simply remove it. >> >> I'd be for solution 1. I feel it's a valuable addition and as it >> works for the latest and greatest Maven, this makes sense to keep it. >> >> WDYT? >> >> Cheers >> >> >> 2013/3/15 Baptiste MATHUS <[email protected]> >> >> No problem, and true for the IT. >> I've copied the demo from the website and forgot to update that part. >> I can re-roll a release. Now >> >> > > -- > Sent from my phone > -- Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net Sauvez un arbre, Mangez un castor !
