On Sep 17, 2010, at 12:30 AM, Andy wrote: > The question is, how happy are you for commiters (I guess I mean me, but also > anyone interested) to try and clean up some of these issues in trunk? - Or > would a pure Java 1.6 branch be the safer option, at least until wide ranging > changes are tested by several devs on varying platforms.
Changes of any kind are welcome. Basic rule of thumb is to post a note to the list and be open to changes. You're doing both already, so great :) > I would like to put something as drastic as this in the top pom (which > overrides the Apache 7 pom), and work down from there: > > <plugin> > <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> > <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId> > <version>2.3.2</version> > <configuration> > <source>1.6</source> > <target>1.6</target> > </configuration> > </plugin> > > I'd also like to ensure that all poms reference their parents throughout the > project so that it is possible to pull up plugin and dependency definitions > as high as possible. On this one just make sure to leave the examples untouched. They are intentionally not using any parent pom so that each one is a completely self-contained example. > This cannot be done without builds initially failing until all issues are > resolved - Issues meaning all the ones that arise on 'other' devs machines > when everything seems fine on a local build ;-) On the note of things failing. Would be great to get us setup in Hudson for CI and publishing binaries: https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/ As far as I know it's a matter of filing a request here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA -David PS Careful of "thread hijacking" (starting new threads by replying to an unrelated email). It makes things look like one big discussion in email clients that support threading and most the online archives like Nabble ( http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/OpenEJB-Dev-f982480.html )
