I think it's just a bug. Should be fixable. On Thursday, June 7, 2012, Eric Sammer wrote:
> I'd prefer not to have such a requirement on m3 (m2 is still pretty > prevalent, I think). I thought it was introduced with the doc stuff. I know > maven-site-plugin is super different in m3 but I honestly haven't kept up > with the state of the art. My feeling was just that if it was a hard dep > now, we should complain loudly if we don't have m3. > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Mike Percy > <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Eric Sammer >> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> >> > wrote: >> >>> Mike: If we now have a hard dep on Maven 3, can you open a JIRA to >>> update the root pom to do the version check? I forget how to do it, but >>> there's a way of specifying the desired version in the pom. >> >> >> Hey Eric, I'm open to getting it fixed if someone wants to dig into it. >> I'm not sure we *have* to have a hard dep on Maven 3... >> >> But if depending on Maven 3 gives us some maintainability benefits >> without adding undue burden on new contributors then let's do it. I'm not >> familiar enough with the differences to have a strong opinion one way or >> the other. Any thoughts on this? >> >> Thanks, >> Mike >> >> > > > -- > Eric Sammer > twitter: esammer > data: www.cloudera.com >
