bug report
Hi Dev team, Not sure this is the right mail address for my report, since no link for the maven issue list on mail-lists page. It's a tricky problem from my perspective, as following: MS excel file couldn't be copied to target folder correctly (meaning excel file in the destination folder crashed actually), if it's under java/main/resources for a Web app So for a Web app, java/main/resources/pkg1/pkg2/some.xls crashed java/main/resources/some.xlscrashed java/main/resource/some.xls OK java/test/resources/pkg1/some.xls OK for a non-Web app, any path is OK, but if matches 1) It's a Web app 2) Excel file is under main/resources then, copied excel file in the destination folder crashed. Is it a bug? Does above make sense to you, or if this is not the right mail address, could you provide me a correct one? Rgds. Yongming Feng (Kevin) GTS Australia State Street Hangzhou J2 Building, 1, Road 8, Xiyuan West Lake Science Technology Economic Park San Dun, West Lake District Hangzhou 310030 P.R. China yf...@statestreet.com mailto:n...@statestreet.com The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and/or privileged information/communication and intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s). If you are not an intended recipient or a person responsible for delivery to an intended recipient, please notify the author and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure, retention, or distribution of this email and the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Go green. Consider the environment before printing this email.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Paul Gier pg...@redhat.com wrote: I wonder if we really need a full vote for every alpha. Especially if this is going to happen every two weeks. Why not just vote for a 2 week alpha release schedule and then don't do another vote until it's time for beta 1? The ASF requires a vote on the artifacts being released. You can't just sign a blank cheque for any future release. On that basis someone could put something that isn't allowed (e.g. a copy of some GPL code) into maven and then just cut an alpha release. I tried to find something in the ASF docs, but the release FAQ only says Each PMC must obey the ASF requirements on approving any release - but I can't find something that specifically says what the requirements on approving any release are. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html Niall Benjamin Bentmann wrote: Hi, We solved some more issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500version=14952 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truepid=10500status=1 Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-018/ Staged source and binary distros: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-018/org/apache/maven/apache-maven/3.0-alpha-5/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 +1 from me Benjamim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Re: Need advice to get Sonar Mojo working with Maven 3.0
Hi Simon, I'm very interested in trying out Sonar with Maven 3. Did you make any progress on this topic? Regards, Sascha Simon Brandhof wrote: Thank you Olivier. I'll have a look at this new component. On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote: Hi, What I can suggest is to have a look at the site plugin 3.x branch [1]. The class DefaultMavenReportExecutor.java use the new MavenPluginManager to execute report plugin. Note it's a work in progress but the most part is already here. -- Olivier [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/branches/maven-site-plugin-3.x 2009/11/13 Simon Brandhof simon.brand...@sonarsource.com: Hi guys, I'm a developer of Sonar [1] and need advices from Maven experts on Maven3 architecture. Indeed the Sonar maven plugin [2] configures and executes on the fly other maven plugins such as Checkstyle or Cobertura. To do that, it currently uses the component org.apache.maven.plugin. PluginManager, but this doesn't work anymore with Maven 3.0-alpha-3. Executing the method executeMojo() throws an OperationNotSupportedException. Rather than finding a simple workaround, I'd like to understand how I should implement the Sonar plugin with the Maven3 philosophy in mind. To sum up the pom must be updated at runtime and maven plugins executed in independent contexts. Any recommendations are welcome. Thank you very much, Simon [1] http://sonar.codehaus.org [2] http://svn.codehaus.org/mojo/trunk/mojo/sonar-maven-plugin/ Simon Brandhof SonarSource.com twitter.com/SonarSource twitter.com/SimonBrandhof -- Olivier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Re: Need advice to get Sonar Mojo working with Maven 3.0
Hi Sascha, Unfortunately no, and I can't promise you any release date. But you can vote for the issue SONAR-1265 [1] in order to increase its priority. Thank you Simon [1] http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONAR-1265 On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Sascha Scholz sa.scholz.at.sap.com@ googlemail.com wrote: Hi Simon, I'm very interested in trying out Sonar with Maven 3. Did you make any progress on this topic? Regards, Sascha Simon Brandhof wrote: Thank you Olivier. I'll have a look at this new component. On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote: Hi, What I can suggest is to have a look at the site plugin 3.x branch [1]. The class DefaultMavenReportExecutor.java use the new MavenPluginManager to execute report plugin. Note it's a work in progress but the most part is already here. -- Olivier [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/branches/maven-site-plugin-3.x 2009/11/13 Simon Brandhof simon.brand...@sonarsource.com: Hi guys, I'm a developer of Sonar [1] and need advices from Maven experts on Maven3 architecture. Indeed the Sonar maven plugin [2] configures and executes on the fly other maven plugins such as Checkstyle or Cobertura. To do that, it currently uses the component org.apache.maven.plugin. PluginManager, but this doesn't work anymore with Maven 3.0-alpha-3. Executing the method executeMojo() throws an OperationNotSupportedException. Rather than finding a simple workaround, I'd like to understand how I should implement the Sonar plugin with the Maven3 philosophy in mind. To sum up the pom must be updated at runtime and maven plugins executed in independent contexts. Any recommendations are welcome. Thank you very much, Simon [1] http://sonar.codehaus.org [2] http://svn.codehaus.org/mojo/trunk/mojo/sonar-maven-plugin/ Simon Brandhof SonarSource.com twitter.com/SonarSource twitter.com/SimonBrandhof -- Olivier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
Niall Pemberton wrote: On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Paul Gier pg...@redhat.com wrote: I wonder if we really need a full vote for every alpha. Especially if this is going to happen every two weeks. Why not just vote for a 2 week alpha release schedule and then don't do another vote until it's time for beta 1? The ASF requires a vote on the artifacts being released. You can't just sign a blank cheque for any future release. On that basis someone could put something that isn't allowed (e.g. a copy of some GPL code) into maven and then just cut an alpha release. I tried to find something in the ASF docs, but the release FAQ only says Each PMC must obey the ASF requirements on approving any release - but I can't find something that specifically says what the requirements on approving any release are. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html That's written up under http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html Adding a link to the voting doc from the release doc would probably be wise, but it's always a huge mess when somebody tries to modify release.html :-) -Dan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's just not going to happen. On 2009-11-25, at 2:10 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote: Niall Pemberton wrote: On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Paul Gier pg...@redhat.com wrote: I wonder if we really need a full vote for every alpha. Especially if this is going to happen every two weeks. Why not just vote for a 2 week alpha release schedule and then don't do another vote until it's time for beta 1? The ASF requires a vote on the artifacts being released. You can't just sign a blank cheque for any future release. On that basis someone could put something that isn't allowed (e.g. a copy of some GPL code) into maven and then just cut an alpha release. I tried to find something in the ASF docs, but the release FAQ only says Each PMC must obey the ASF requirements on approving any release - but I can't find something that specifically says what the requirements on approving any release are. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html That's written up under http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html Adding a link to the voting doc from the release doc would probably be wise, but it's always a huge mess when somebody tries to modify release.html :-) -Dan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Shade Plugin 1.2.2
Vote open for 72 hours. Ping Benjamin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Shade Plugin 1.2.2
+1 2009/11/25 Benjamin Bentmann benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu: Vote open for 72 hours. Ping Benjamin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Shade Plugin 1.2.2
+1 On 2009-11-25, at 5:22 PM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote: Vote open for 72 hours. Ping Benjamin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Shade Plugin 1.2.2
+1 2009/11/22 Benjamin Bentmann benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu: Hi, We solved 7 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11540version=15525 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truepid=11540status=1 Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-017/ Staging site (sync pending): http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin-1.2.2/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 +1 from me Benjamin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Olivier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Maven Shade Plugin 1.2.2
Hi, The vote has passed with the following result: +1 (binding): Benjamin Bentmann, Vincent Siveton, Jason van Zyl, Olivier Lamy +1 (non-binding): Mark Struberg, Stephen Connolly I will promote the artifacts to the central repository and continue with the release. Benjamin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's just not going to happen. I don't understand what the issue is with the current process. Benjamin is already getting them out faster than the majority of people will be able to test and review them. Any faster and you might as well just be using the CI builds for whatever purpose you have in mind. You're not going to be able to push out anything from Sonatype that's any more official than those, so what benefit does anyone get from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds and loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing? The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there for good reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize releases and the users know what they are getting, and to encourage actually doing releases (instead of everyone running their own version of trunk). I don't see any upside to a change that loses those. There's no problem pointing individuals to the grid for *testing* purposes as far as I know, as long as they know what they are getting is not a release and may not work at all. Thanks, Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
Let's not beat the dead horse. No one cares. There's not good reason for not releasing something immediately if there are fixes available. That's just not the way it works here, that's fine and not a big deal. On 2009-11-25, at 7:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote: On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's just not going to happen. I don't understand what the issue is with the current process. Benjamin is already getting them out faster than the majority of people will be able to test and review them. Any faster and you might as well just be using the CI builds for whatever purpose you have in mind. You're not going to be able to push out anything from Sonatype that's any more official than those, so what benefit does anyone get from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds and loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing? The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there for good reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize releases and the users know what they are getting, and to encourage actually doing releases (instead of everyone running their own version of trunk). I don't see any upside to a change that loses those. There's no problem pointing individuals to the grid for *testing* purposes as far as I know, as long as they know what they are getting is not a release and may not work at all. Thanks, Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
I would also like to contribute my frustration with the current build process. It's great the alpha releases are coming out often, but I cannot possibly be testing them at the frequency you guys are currently tagging and voting. I thought the once a week alpha was a good idea until it actually happened. If you guys voted once every three weeks, it would be much easier for me to participate. I wonder if others believe the same. Paul On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Jason van Zyl ja...@maven.org wrote: Let's not beat the dead horse. No one cares. There's not good reason for not releasing something immediately if there are fixes available. That's just not the way it works here, that's fine and not a big deal. On 2009-11-25, at 7:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote: On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's just not going to happen. I don't understand what the issue is with the current process. Benjamin is already getting them out faster than the majority of people will be able to test and review them. Any faster and you might as well just be using the CI builds for whatever purpose you have in mind. You're not going to be able to push out anything from Sonatype that's any more official than those, so what benefit does anyone get from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds and loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing? The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there for good reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize releases and the users know what they are getting, and to encourage actually doing releases (instead of everyone running their own version of trunk). I don't see any upside to a change that loses those. There's no problem pointing individuals to the grid for *testing* purposes as far as I know, as long as they know what they are getting is not a release and may not work at all. Thanks, Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: voting was: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-5
2009/11/26 Paul Benedict pbened...@apache.org: I would also like to contribute my frustration with the current build process. It's great the alpha releases are coming out often, but I cannot possibly be testing them at the frequency you guys are currently tagging and voting. I thought the once a week alpha was a good idea until it actually happened. If you guys voted once every three weeks, it would be much easier for me to participate. I wonder if others believe the same. IMHO, once a week vs once every three weeks makes little difference. The important metric is is the next release X bugs better than the last release. Personally, if at least 5 bugs have been fixed and it has been at least 1 week since the last alpha, I say run a release again especially given that running a release of a 3.0-alpha seems to be so much easier. These are alpha's, we have a great IT framework (thanks to benjamin), so voting +1 has got to be easier. If you don't feel like testing every release, test every other release and only vote only for those you feel comfortable voting for (i.e. you tested) -Stephen Paul On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Jason van Zyl ja...@maven.org wrote: Let's not beat the dead horse. No one cares. There's not good reason for not releasing something immediately if there are fixes available. That's just not the way it works here, that's fine and not a big deal. On 2009-11-25, at 7:52 PM, Brett Porter wrote: On 26/11/2009, at 6:24 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: If ever we really needed to push out builds more frequently I would just do it from Sonatype. I've given up trying to be truly agile at Apache, it's just not going to happen. I don't understand what the issue is with the current process. Benjamin is already getting them out faster than the majority of people will be able to test and review them. Any faster and you might as well just be using the CI builds for whatever purpose you have in mind. You're not going to be able to push out anything from Sonatype that's any more official than those, so what benefit does anyone get from a build that loses the frequency of CI builds and loses the benefit of being reviewed before publishing? The rules about not promoting snapshots to users are there for good reasons - to make sure the PMC does actually authorize releases and the users know what they are getting, and to encourage actually doing releases (instead of everyone running their own version of trunk). I don't see any upside to a change that loses those. There's no problem pointing individuals to the grid for *testing* purposes as far as I know, as long as they know what they are getting is not a release and may not work at all. Thanks, Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
