Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Enforcer version 1.0.1 - Take 2
hrm, sorry but I think there is actually a problem now with the stage site. In r1136499 [1] you removed the version number from the staging location. I'm not sure if there is a formal rule but we usually stage the RC sites at a unique location that is kept after the release for reference. For instance: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.8/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.7/ etc. The staging location you specified now will be overwritten at the next release. Problem is I'm not sure if relative links will work with the versioned locations, I will try to find a minute today to test. sigh... :( -Lukas [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1136499 Kristian Rosenvold wrote: Hi, The release includes the enforcer-plugin, enforcer-rules and enforcer-api modules. The site-staging problems from take 1 were fixed in r1136499. The only diff between this vote and take 1 is the site deployment. We solved 2 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530version=16879 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidejqlQuery=project+%3D+MENFORCER+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-011/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/staging/plugins/maven-enforcer-plugin/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1 Kristian - 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 Enforcer version 1.0.1 - Take 2
I am aware of that problem, I did not know how to fix it. If you know how to do it better, please help. I will test it ;) I was happy that the project site staged consistently and without manual intervention according to standard maven deployment procedure. Unless there actually is a policy that we *must* stage to version-specific areas (as opposed to a recommendation) I'll keep this vote open. After all, most previous sites for enforcer seem to have been staged on the flipside of napkins ;) Kristian Den 17.06.2011 08:26, skrev Lukas Theussl: hrm, sorry but I think there is actually a problem now with the stage site. In r1136499 [1] you removed the version number from the staging location. I'm not sure if there is a formal rule but we usually stage the RC sites at a unique location that is kept after the release for reference. For instance: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.8/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.7/ etc. The staging location you specified now will be overwritten at the next release. Problem is I'm not sure if relative links will work with the versioned locations, I will try to find a minute today to test. sigh... :( -Lukas [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1136499 Kristian Rosenvold wrote: Hi, The release includes the enforcer-plugin, enforcer-rules and enforcer-api modules. The site-staging problems from take 1 were fixed in r1136499. The only diff between this vote and take 1 is the site deployment. We solved 2 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530version=16879 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidejqlQuery=project+%3D+MENFORCER+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-011/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/staging/plugins/maven-enforcer-plugin/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1 Kristian - 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: Moving forward with mixins
I wondered about the import restriction for a long time already. Imo this _exactly_ feels natural. Much more than having multiple parents. Also the pom for the main artifacts might stay pretty much 4.0, but our MavenProject Parser would need more fidling. Of course we could define a new packaging 'ppom' (partial pom) or kind of for the parts which can get imported. A minor problem could be in which sorting order to add plugins from any imported ppom to the project. And how merging/overriding would look like if an imported ppom defines the same plugin GAV as the pom. ppoms can of course import other ppoms and build a hierarchy that way. LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 6/17/11, Brett Porter br...@apache.org wrote: From: Brett Porter br...@apache.org Subject: Re: Moving forward with mixins To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 12:11 AM (sorry for the delay, I've not forgotten, just been busy) On 25/05/2011, at 12:34 AM, Jesse Glick wrote: On 05/24/2011 01:30 AM, Brett Porter wrote: Some notes on how I think it should work: - templates should look like a normal POM (perhaps only differing in root element, and less strict validation requirements) [...] - any POM element is valid, other than parent,groupId,artifactId,version,templates,modules - templates need to be sourced from the repository [...] - templates should have an extension xml in the repository. [...] Maybe I am missing some unmentioned constraints, but the problem as I see it is just that the existing parent mechanism does not support multiple inheritance. The sketch above sounds like something that is similar to regular inheritance, yet syntactically different, and requiring a new packaging etc. If the POM schema for the child (~ importer) needs to be extended anyway, why not make it look and work as much as possible like the existing mechanism? While I think it should be very close in behaviour, there's a fairly significant semantic difference between the parent and the mixin. The parent offers some grouping - a canonical set of stuff several projects pick up, where a mixin is something a project pulls in to add to itself. For example, you said: You would of course have to define some logic for picking which parent (or grandparent...) wins in case of a conflict on some item. I think the most natural choice is a depth-first search up through the parent graph, in the declared order. (Note that this implies that groupId, artifactId, and version may be inherited as before, but only from the first declared parent.) This makes the first parent special, which is potentially confusing and its better to be explicit. Note: the functionality of scope=import in current versions of Maven, limited to supplying dependencyManagement, would be subsumed by a feature like this. If you really wanted to avoid any XSD change to pom.xml you could just broaden the interpretation of scope=import (so it could inherit other configuration, and perhaps could be permitted in regular dependencies outside of dependencyManagement), though the syntax would be less intuitive than parents. I think that scope is a bit confusing, and not frequently used. It's really time we stopped applying bandaids and made it possible to change the POM... FWIW, I did start to port my previous work to get that happening. The main thing I'm still working on is identifying the touchpoints so that POMs in the repository work across both Maven 2 3. If anyone wants to help with that, let me know... - Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter - 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: Regarding Archetype customization
OK... I have another question. when i run mvn archetype:generate it asks for parameters like groupId , artifactId , package and version. Now i want to ask for an extra parameter like module-author but i want to ask in this manner *Do you want to enter module-author? ( Y / N)* (on entering Y , i should ask for the parameter) *Y* *module-author: nameoftheauthor* (on entering N , i should terminate the process and project build should be completed) *N* *.* *.* *Project Build Success Full * * * -- Is this possible with ArchetypeCreationQueryer ? .. i guess i got an source file here DefaultArchetypeCreationQueryerhttp://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/archetype/tags/maven-archetype-2.0/maven-archetype-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/archetype/ui/DefaultArchetypeCreationQueryer.java but i dont know how to implement it in my project and run it and see how it works? Any help will be thank full -Goutham On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY [via Maven] ml-node+4496827-180858103-220...@n5.nabble.com wrote: sorry, this is not an actual feature of archetype plugin Regards, Hervé Le jeudi 16 juin 2011, goutham a écrit : I have a question regarding Archetype customization. Consider i have two files FILE1.java and FILE2.java , How can i customize my archetype-metadata.xml so that , according to my choice i can select FILE1.java or FILE2.java at the time of mvn archetype:generate. Is it possible ? Can you send me related tutorial or working tutorial? Regards -Goutham -- View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Regarding-Archetype-customization-tp44941 31p4494131.html Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=4496827i=0 For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=4496827i=1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=4496827i=2 For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=4496827i=3 -- If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Regarding-Archetype-customization-tp4494131p4496827.html To unsubscribe from Regarding Archetype customization, click herehttp://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_codenode=4494131code=Z291dGhhbS52YXNpcmVkZGlAZ21haWwuY29tfDQ0OTQxMzF8MTY3OTUzMTU3NQ==. -- View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Regarding-Archetype-customization-tp4494131p4498181.html Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: PMC change explanation?
For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache, Sonatype employees are unable to simultaneously legally act for Sonatype and Apache at the same time. So the ASF has removed Sonatype employees from the Maven PMC in order to remove them from conflict. Doug On 06/16/2011 05:11 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only the board has the right to reveal the business that has been transacted on private lists. Rest assured that's Sonatype's commitment to Maven users and our pursuit of innovation with respect to Maven-related technologies has not stopped, and will not stop. On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jeff Jensen wrote: Is there a forthcoming explanation for a seemingly Maven PMC shakeup? I find it odd that consistently excellent contributors such as Lukas, Brian, et al are suddenly not on the Maven PMC. This is concerning as these are people who have drastically improved and moved Maven forward. It's very concerning that a heavy committer such as Benjamin is no longer committing as he has done very useful, fantastic work. These events are very concerning for the forward progress of Maven. The strong temptations for competitive products, a la Gradle, do not allow Maven progress to stop; particularly the best progress to date of the past year. These events are detrimental. For us uninformed, what happened, why is it good, what is the plan forward behind this? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - We all have problems. How we deal with them is a measure of our worth. -- Unknown - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jason, the board has not leaked the information, so rest assured it was not from us. Also rest assured that no one questions Sonatypes committment to the users nor your pursuit of innovation. We only question why Sonatype refuses to attribute Maven as a mark of the ASF, even after I was assured by Wayne after lunch that Sonatype would make those changes while we come up with an acceptable MOU regarding maven.org. On Jun 16, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only the board has the right to reveal the business that has been transacted on private lists. Rest assured that's Sonatype's commitment to Maven users and our pursuit of innovation with respect to Maven-related technologies has not stopped, and will not stop. On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jeff Jensen wrote: Is there a forthcoming explanation for a seemingly Maven PMC shakeup? I find it odd that consistently excellent contributors such as Lukas, Brian, et al are suddenly not on the Maven PMC. This is concerning as these are people who have drastically improved and moved Maven forward. It's very concerning that a heavy committer such as Benjamin is no longer committing as he has done very useful, fantastic work. These events are very concerning for the forward progress of Maven. The strong temptations for competitive products, a la Gradle, do not allow Maven progress to stop; particularly the best progress to date of the past year. These events are detrimental. For us uninformed, what happened, why is it good, what is the plan forward behind this? - 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 - We all have problems. How we deal with them is a measure of our worth. -- Unknown - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache, Sonatype employees are unable to simultaneously legally act for Sonatype and Apache at the same time. So the ASF has removed Sonatype employees from the Maven PMC in order to remove them from conflict. Doug On 06/16/2011 05:11 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only the board has the right to reveal the business that has been transacted on private lists. Rest assured that's Sonatype's commitment to Maven users and our pursuit of innovation with respect to Maven-related technologies has not stopped, and will not stop. On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jeff Jensen wrote: Is there a forthcoming explanation for a seemingly Maven PMC shakeup? I find it odd that consistently excellent contributors such as Lukas, Brian, et al are suddenly not on the Maven PMC. This is concerning as these are people who have drastically improved and moved Maven forward. It's very concerning that a heavy committer such as Benjamin is no longer committing as he has done very useful, fantastic work. These events are
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache, Sonatype employees are unable to simultaneously legally act for Sonatype and Apache at the same time. So the ASF has removed Sonatype employees from the Maven PMC in order to remove them from conflict. Doug On 06/16/2011 05:11 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Remote Resources Plugin version 1.2.1
+1 LieGrue, strub --- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote: From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Remote Resources Plugin version 1.2.1 To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:24 PM +1 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com: Hi, We solved 1 issue: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11391version=17198 There are still 2 issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidejqlQuery=project+%3D+MRRESOURCES+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-010/ Staging site: (Sync pending) http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-remote-resources-plugin-1.2.1/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1 Kristian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://www.linkedin.com/in/olamy - 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: PMC change explanation?
On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, the board has not leaked the information, so rest assured it was not from us. I'm not sure what information you're referring to. Also rest assured that no one questions Sonatypes committment to the users nor your pursuit of innovation. We only question why Sonatype refuses to attribute Maven as a mark of the ASF, even after I was assured by Wayne after lunch that Sonatype would make those changes while we come up with an acceptable MOU regarding maven.org. No, that's not what I recall being the order of events. But everything I know is second hand and broken telephone doesn't help anyone. You should get on the phone with Wayne and clarify because there have been repeated miscommunications and misunderstandings because you fail to follow up in the timely manner, or don't follow up at all. As a result of that you've left this project in the lurch and made Sonatype feel like an un-welcomed part of this community. Why would we want to participate here when we are treated like no other company involved at Apache has ever been treated? It would have taken you all of a day to settle the MOU issue when you talked to Wayne last but you passed the buck to the Maven PMC instead of dealing with it yourself. You took this out of the hands of the Maven PMC after we had a resolution so I have no idea you passed the issue back to them instead of driving the issue to resolution yourself. Three weeks has passed and nothing has happened. It may very be that what are understanding and what you relayed to the Maven PMC is not in sync. Get on the phone with Wayne put Larry Rosen on the phone as secretary, record the plan of action that will resolve the issue at hand and be done with it. You've made it several more orders of magnitude more complicated than it ever needed to be. On Jun 16, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only the board has the right to reveal the business that has been transacted on private lists. Rest assured that's Sonatype's commitment to Maven users and our pursuit of innovation with respect to Maven-related technologies has not stopped, and will not stop. On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jeff Jensen wrote: Is there a forthcoming explanation for a seemingly Maven PMC shakeup? I find it odd that consistently excellent contributors such as Lukas, Brian, et al are suddenly not on the Maven PMC. This is concerning as these are people who have drastically improved and moved Maven forward. It's very concerning that a heavy committer such as Benjamin is no longer committing as he has done very useful, fantastic work. These events are very concerning for the forward progress of Maven. The strong temptations for competitive products, a la Gradle, do not allow Maven progress to stop; particularly the best progress to date of the past year. These events are detrimental. For us uninformed, what happened, why is it good, what is the plan forward behind this? - 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 - We all have problems. How we deal with them is a measure of our worth. -- Unknown - 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 - Three people can keep a secret provided two of them are dead. -- Unknown
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache, Sonatype employees are unable to simultaneously legally act for Sonatype and Apache at the same time. So the ASF has removed Sonatype employees from the Maven PMC in order to remove them from conflict. Doug On 06/16/2011 05:11 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Verifier version 1.3
+1 LieGrue, strub --- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote: From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Verifier version 1.3 To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:25 PM +1 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com: Hi, We solved/improved quite a few things. Issue tracking does not seem to be actively used for this project, svn log attached below Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-012/ Staging site: (Sync pending) http://maven.apache.org/shared/maven-verifier-1.3/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1. Kristian == CHANGELOG == r815892 | jdcasey | 2009-09-16 19:12:28 +0200 (on., 16 sep. 2009) | 1 line removing one-off source release assemblies (and config), then upgrading parent version for all shared projects up to 12, so source-release will be automatic. r823739 | bentmann | 2009-10-10 01:20:57 +0200 (lø., 10 okt. 2009) | 1 line o Added support to launch ITs using embedded Maven 3.x r824335 | bentmann | 2009-10-12 15:47:17 +0200 (ma., 12 okt. 2009) | 1 line o Added another embedded launcher that does not load Maven from a home directory but from the class path, this allows us to run the core ITs with the Maven from our IDE workspace r912161 | bentmann | 2010-02-20 18:46:18 +0100 (lø., 20 feb. 2010) | 1 line o Simplified configuration of environment variables r920045 | bentmann | 2010-03-07 18:43:28 +0100 (sø., 07 mars 2010) | 1 line o Added setter for fork option r920448 | bentmann | 2010-03-08 19:55:39 +0100 (ma., 08 mars 2010) | 1 line o Removed validation of goal list to allow execution of default goals given in POM r931543 | bentmann | 2010-04-07 15:41:19 +0200 (on., 07 april 2010) | 1 line o Fixed argument quoting to recognize more special characters r936076 | krosenvold | 2010-04-20 23:58:36 +0200 (ti., 20 april 2010) | 1 line o Removed deadlock-prone synchronization r944714 | bentmann | 2010-05-15 22:29:45 +0200 (lø., 15 mai 2010) | 1 line o Added method to purge specific g:a:v from local repo r948765 | bentmann | 2010-05-27 12:31:10 +0200 (to., 27 mai 2010) | 1 line o Disabled EMMA runtime controller to prevent port clashes during CI r981591 | bentmann | 2010-08-02 18:44:34 +0200 (ma., 02 aug. 2010) | 1 line o Added convenience method to add CLI option r983169 | hboutemy | 2010-08-07 05:29:54 +0200 (lø., 07 aug. 2010) | 1 line updated issue management urls to point precisely to the component in MSHARED r1029201 | bentmann | 2010-10-30 23:04:17 +0200 (lø., 30 okt. 2010) | 1 line o Set user.dir when running embedded Maven r1033965 | bentmann | 2010-11-11 16:39:40 +0100 (to., 11 nov. 2010) | 1 line o Ensured parent directory of filtered file exists r1050248 | bentmann | 2010-12-17 01:15:51 +0100 (fr., 17 des. 2010) | 1 line o Added methods to further help inspection of local repo contents r1050251 | bentmann | 2010-12-17 01:19:14 +0100 (fr., 17 des. 2010) | 1 line o Made local repo layout customizable r1050255 | bentmann | 2010-12-17 01:29:11 +0100 (fr., 17 des. 2010) | 1 line o Added convenience option to remote debug mvn r1050405 | bentmann | 2010-12-17 15:44:23 +0100 (fr., 17 des. 2010) | 1 line o Allowed to query path to
Re: PMC change explanation?
On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. That's a separate issue from the Maven software product trademark. Let's please not confuse them. The action I described and the attribution the ASF seeks is related to the product trademark, not any service mark. ... Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting ... FWIW, I am not a Cloudera founder, just an employee. Doug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jason! I bet you are well aware that the PMC is actively working on an MOU since a few weeks. (I even was roughly walking thru the draft with a Sonatype employee yesterday). So please relax a bit and stop throwing oil on the fire. LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 6/17/11, Jason van Zyl ja...@sonatype.com wrote: From: Jason van Zyl ja...@sonatype.com Subject: Re: PMC change explanation? To: Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com Cc: Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org, Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org, Apache Board bo...@apache.org Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 1:31 PM Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been
Re: PMC change explanation?
The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the board doesn't really care what happens to the Maven project. I think Sonatype has been reasonable, I think I can even dig up an email that says your legal counsel thinks we have been reasonable. Just put the issue to rest and one of you call Wayne. It's absurd that it's come to this. The Apache Board can put this issue to rest, or permanently screw the project. I don't think it's in anyone else's hands really except the Apache Board. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. That's a separate issue from the Maven software product trademark. Let's please not confuse them. The action I described and the attribution the ASF seeks is related to the product trademark, not any service mark. ... Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting ... FWIW, I am not a Cloudera founder, just an employee. Doug Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - What matters is not ideas, but the people who have them. Good people can fix bad ideas, but good ideas can't save bad people. -- Paul Graham
Re: PMC change explanation?
Not sure what there is to sort out... But of course, you are also welcome to get on the phone and sort it out as well. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache, Sonatype employees are unable to simultaneously legally act for Sonatype and Apache
Re: PMC change explanation?
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: Jason! I bet you are well aware that the PMC is actively working on an MOU since a few weeks. (I even was roughly walking thru the draft with a Sonatype employee yesterday). I'm not well aware at all. How can anyone at Sonatype be aware of anything on the Maven PMC is doing? You're trying to reach a resolution without us being a part of it. You need to talk to Wayne and as far as I know you didn't talk to him yesterday. So please relax a bit and stop throwing oil on the fire. I'm pointing out the facts, and giving you the fastest way to resolve the issue. LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 6/17/11, Jason van Zyl ja...@sonatype.com wrote: From: Jason van Zyl ja...@sonatype.com Subject: Re: PMC change explanation? To: Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com Cc: Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org, Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org, Apache Board bo...@apache.org Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 1:31 PM Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.9
+1 LieGrue, strub --- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote: From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.9 To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:26 PM +1 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com: Hi, We solved 17 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10541version=17312 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidejqlQuery=project+%3D+SUREFIRE+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-013/ Staging site: (Sync pending) http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-failsafe-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-report-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/surefire/staging/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1 Kristian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://www.linkedin.com/in/olamy - 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: PMC change explanation?
Email coming your way. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Not sure what there is to sort out... But of course, you are also welcome to get on the phone and sort it out as well. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I would encourage you to look over, for example, Mark Thomas' work the last *week* regarding the tomcatexpert stuff). If your intent is to enflame the issue, then Good Work. If your intent was to actually provide informative and not misleading data, then I would have to give you a D-. Since this is from your Sonatype Email, can I assume that you are sending this with your Sonatype hat on? On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. In addition, the Apache Board felt the Maven PMC dysfunctional for not being more forceful with this trademark issue even though the Apache Board, by example, has never been this forceful with any other company as a whole. Not Wandisco, not Cloudera, not SpringSource. In this regard the Maven PMC should have been disbanded, but instead the board targeted a whole company. Which by Apache's own philosophy of itself being a collection of individuals seems rather odd to me. So that's a summary of the trademark issue and Doug started the conversation with trademarks so I'm fine disclosing that part of the story. If Doug and Jim want to continue the discussion about the other major issue then again, I will leave the initiation of that discussion to them. On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's Maven trademark. Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states only that Apache Maven is a trademark of the ASF, not that Maven alone is also a trademark of the ASF. Since Sonatype seems to dispute that this trademark belongs to Apache,
Re: PMC change explanation?
The below shows that you are extremely out of touch regarding what has been going on. As such, I have no problems with ignoring it. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the board doesn't really care what happens to the Maven project. I think Sonatype has been reasonable, I think I can even dig up an email that says your legal counsel thinks we have been reasonable. Just put the issue to rest and one of you call Wayne. It's absurd that it's come to this. The Apache Board can put this issue to rest, or permanently screw the project. I don't think it's in anyone else's hands really except the Apache Board. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. That's a separate issue from the Maven software product trademark. Let's please not confuse them. The action I described and the attribution the ASF seeks is related to the product trademark, not any service mark. ... Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting ... FWIW, I am not a Cloudera founder, just an employee. Doug Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - What matters is not ideas, but the people who have them. Good people can fix bad ideas, but good ideas can't save bad people. -- Paul Graham - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jim, Your misunderstanding of someone else's point of view and dismissing it out of hand without any further discussion is what got us here in the first place. You have no problems ignoring whatever you feel like which generally makes it hard to arrive at a resolution. Your job as an ASF Board member is to facilitate discussion not stifle it. It is your repeated canceling of face to face meetings and lack of communication over the span of months that has left us where we are. You shirk your responsibility as the board member primarily responsible for this debacle and then basically refuse to be accountable by just saying you're going to ignore me. If you want to ignore me that's fine, but don't ignore the problem you've heavily contributed to forming. I don't need to be involved but the board, Mark Struberg (who appears to be responsible now from the Maven PMC side), Larry and Wayne can get this resolved with one call. Then it's done and we can move forward and do what's best for the Maven project and more importantly Maven users. On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The below shows that you are extremely out of touch regarding what has been going on. As such, I have no problems with ignoring it. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the board doesn't really care what happens to the Maven project. I think Sonatype has been reasonable, I think I can even dig up an email that says your legal counsel thinks we have been reasonable. Just put the issue to rest and one of you call Wayne. It's absurd that it's come to this. The Apache Board can put this issue to rest, or permanently screw the project. I don't think it's in anyone else's hands really except the Apache Board. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. That's a separate issue from the Maven software product trademark. Let's please not confuse them. The action I described and the attribution the ASF seeks is related to the product trademark, not any service mark. ... Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting ... FWIW, I am not a Cloudera founder, just an employee. Doug Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - What matters is not ideas, but the people who have them. Good people can fix bad ideas, but good ideas can't save bad people. -- Paul Graham - 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 - Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction. -- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kurosawa
Re: PMC change explanation?
FWIW, I'm glad the PMC has had the chance to participate in saying what it wants in the MOU with Sonatype. Unfortunately, such participation has to happen as we have time, and since we're a project of volunteers it may not happen on the timescales that companies are used to. So, if the buck has been passed to the PMC (which seems a little strange to me), then I'm glad. Also, I for one don't feel like this project is being left in the lurch. We've seen good progress on ideas and code while all of this has been going on. I regret that this discussion has - and continues to - escalate through all the inflammatory remarks. If we're going to find a way to coexist peacefully after this is settled, those sorts of things only make that job harder. On 6/17/11 9:23 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, the board has not leaked the information, so rest assured it was not from us. I'm not sure what information you're referring to. Also rest assured that no one questions Sonatypes committment to the users nor your pursuit of innovation. We only question why Sonatype refuses to attribute Maven as a mark of the ASF, even after I was assured by Wayne after lunch that Sonatype would make those changes while we come up with an acceptable MOU regarding maven.org http://maven.org. No, that's not what I recall being the order of events. But everything I know is second hand and broken telephone doesn't help anyone. You should get on the phone with Wayne and clarify because there have been repeated miscommunications and misunderstandings because you fail to follow up in the timely manner, or don't follow up at all. As a result of that you've left this project in the lurch and made Sonatype feel like an un-welcomed part of this community. Why would we want to participate here when we are treated like no other company involved at Apache has ever been treated? It would have taken you all of a day to settle the MOU issue when you talked to Wayne last but you passed the buck to the Maven PMC instead of dealing with it yourself. You took this out of the hands of the Maven PMC after we had a resolution so I have no idea you passed the issue back to them instead of driving the issue to resolution yourself. Three weeks has passed and nothing has happened. It may very be that what are understanding and what you relayed to the Maven PMC is not in sync. Get on the phone with Wayne put Larry Rosen on the phone as secretary, record the plan of action that will resolve the issue at hand and be done with it. You've made it several more orders of magnitude more complicated than it ever needed to be. On Jun 16, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jeff, I believe this strictly falls within the purview of the Apache Board to explain. In particular Jim, Doug and Shane. Only the board has the right to reveal the business that has been transacted on private lists. Rest assured that's Sonatype's commitment to Maven users and our pursuit of innovation with respect to Maven-related technologies has not stopped, and will not stop. On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jeff Jensen wrote: Is there a forthcoming explanation for a seemingly Maven PMC shakeup? I find it odd that consistently excellent contributors such as Lukas, Brian, et al are suddenly not on the Maven PMC. This is concerning as these are people who have drastically improved and moved Maven forward. It's very concerning that a heavy committer such as Benjamin is no longer committing as he has done very useful, fantastic work. These events are very concerning for the forward progress of Maven. The strong temptations for competitive products, a la Gradle, do not allow Maven progress to stop; particularly the best progress to date of the past year. These events are detrimental. For us uninformed, what happened, why is it good, what is the plan forward behind this? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - We all have problems. How we deal with them is a measure of our worth. -- Unknown - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org mailto:dev-h...@maven.apache.org Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - Three people can keep a secret provided two of them are dead. --
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Enforcer version 1.0.1 - Take 2
+1 LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 6/17/11, Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com wrote: From: Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Enforcer version 1.0.1 - Take 2 To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 6:38 AM I am aware of that problem, I did not know how to fix it. If you know how to do it better, please help. I will test it ;) I was happy that the project site staged consistently and without manual intervention according to standard maven deployment procedure. Unless there actually is a policy that we *must* stage to version-specific areas (as opposed to a recommendation) I'll keep this vote open. After all, most previous sites for enforcer seem to have been staged on the flipside of napkins ;) Kristian Den 17.06.2011 08:26, skrev Lukas Theussl: hrm, sorry but I think there is actually a problem now with the stage site. In r1136499 [1] you removed the version number from the staging location. I'm not sure if there is a formal rule but we usually stage the RC sites at a unique location that is kept after the release for reference. For instance: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.9/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.8/ http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.7/ etc. The staging location you specified now will be overwritten at the next release. Problem is I'm not sure if relative links will work with the versioned locations, I will try to find a minute today to test. sigh... :( -Lukas [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1136499 Kristian Rosenvold wrote: Hi, The release includes the enforcer-plugin, enforcer-rules and enforcer-api modules. The site-staging problems from take 1 were fixed in r1136499. The only diff between this vote and take 1 is the site deployment. We solved 2 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530version=16879 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidejqlQuery=project+%3D+MENFORCER+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-011/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/staging/plugins/maven-enforcer-plugin/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 And here's my +1 Kristian - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Moving forward with mixins
A highly confusing situation in the current design results from the interaction of parent/, aggregation, and the site plugin. Superficially, it seems very natural: the usual practice is for an aggregating project to be the parent of its modules. Even the terminology is painful: we don't really have a clear term for 'uses project X as parent'. 'Child' is ambiguous, as it could either mean 'is a module of' or 'uses as a parent'. The situation is OK so long as the aggregating project does absolutely nothing except the simplest aggregation. The problem is that there is a conflict between controlling behavior in the aggregating project and setting defaults for the modules. One way to characterize a lack here is this: I'd like to have a pluginManagement/ that applies *only* to the children, not to the current project. So the current way out of this is to make a more complex structure where the aggregating project is not the parent of its modules. Immediately, problems ensue with the site plugin, as it defaults to constructing pathnames on the assumption that modules use their aggregating project as parent. It's possible to fix this with a lot of dorking around with pathnames in url elements. What I want is for the site pathname structure and scm url structure to be inheritable in the obvious way while at the same time being able to block dependency and plugin configuration inheritance. This could be addressed by more attributes like the 'combine' attributes that I just added to the pom doc where they were mysteriously absent since their creation. Or there could be options on the parent/ element, though it seems painful to have to do this over and over in each child. I think I'm looking for localConfiguation. This element could contain build or even pluginManagement or dependencyManagement, and would be defined to effect *only the current project*, not any other project that happens to use it as a parent. On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote: I wondered about the import restriction for a long time already. Imo this _exactly_ feels natural. Much more than having multiple parents. Also the pom for the main artifacts might stay pretty much 4.0, but our MavenProject Parser would need more fidling. Of course we could define a new packaging 'ppom' (partial pom) or kind of for the parts which can get imported. A minor problem could be in which sorting order to add plugins from any imported ppom to the project. And how merging/overriding would look like if an imported ppom defines the same plugin GAV as the pom. ppoms can of course import other ppoms and build a hierarchy that way. LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 6/17/11, Brett Porter br...@apache.org wrote: From: Brett Porter br...@apache.org Subject: Re: Moving forward with mixins To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 12:11 AM (sorry for the delay, I've not forgotten, just been busy) On 25/05/2011, at 12:34 AM, Jesse Glick wrote: On 05/24/2011 01:30 AM, Brett Porter wrote: Some notes on how I think it should work: - templates should look like a normal POM (perhaps only differing in root element, and less strict validation requirements) [...] - any POM element is valid, other than parent,groupId,artifactId,version,templates,modules - templates need to be sourced from the repository [...] - templates should have an extension xml in the repository. [...] Maybe I am missing some unmentioned constraints, but the problem as I see it is just that the existing parent mechanism does not support multiple inheritance. The sketch above sounds like something that is similar to regular inheritance, yet syntactically different, and requiring a new packaging etc. If the POM schema for the child (~ importer) needs to be extended anyway, why not make it look and work as much as possible like the existing mechanism? While I think it should be very close in behaviour, there's a fairly significant semantic difference between the parent and the mixin. The parent offers some grouping - a canonical set of stuff several projects pick up, where a mixin is something a project pulls in to add to itself. For example, you said: You would of course have to define some logic for picking which parent (or grandparent...) wins in case of a conflict on some item. I think the most natural choice is a depth-first search up through the parent graph, in the declared order. (Note that this implies that groupId, artifactId, and version may be inherited as before, but only from the first declared parent.) This makes the first parent special, which is potentially confusing and its better to be explicit. Note: the functionality of scope=import in current versions of Maven, limited to supplying dependencyManagement, would be subsumed by a feature like this. If you really wanted to avoid any XSD change to pom.xml you could just broaden the
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jason, all I can say in response is that I am impressed with both your reinterpretation of history as well as the size of your stugots in somehow placing the blame on the board and myself. We have made incredible progress, and your sweeping and baseless arguments are impeding and damaging that. I would encourage you to, for the benefit of the community, restrain yourself. On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jim, Your misunderstanding of someone else's point of view and dismissing it out of hand without any further discussion is what got us here in the first place. You have no problems ignoring whatever you feel like which generally makes it hard to arrive at a resolution. Your job as an ASF Board member is to facilitate discussion not stifle it. It is your repeated canceling of face to face meetings and lack of communication over the span of months that has left us where we are. You shirk your responsibility as the board member primarily responsible for this debacle and then basically refuse to be accountable by just saying you're going to ignore me. If you want to ignore me that's fine, but don't ignore the problem you've heavily contributed to forming. I don't need to be involved but the board, Mark Struberg (who appears to be responsible now from the Maven PMC side), Larry and Wayne can get this resolved with one call. Then it's done and we can move forward and do what's best for the Maven project and more importantly Maven users. On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The below shows that you are extremely out of touch regarding what has been going on. As such, I have no problems with ignoring it. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the board doesn't really care what happens to the Maven project. I think Sonatype has been reasonable, I think I can even dig up an email that says your legal counsel thinks we have been reasonable. Just put the issue to rest and one of you call Wayne. It's absurd that it's come to this. The Apache Board can put this issue to rest, or permanently screw the project. I don't think it's in anyone else's hands really except the Apache Board. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. That's a separate issue from the Maven software product trademark. Let's please not confuse them. The action I described and the attribution the ASF seeks is related to the product trademark, not any service mark. ... Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting ... FWIW, I am not a Cloudera founder, just an employee. Doug Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl - What matters is not ideas, but the people who have them. Good people can fix bad ideas, but good ideas can't save bad people. -- Paul Graham - 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 - Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction. -- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kurosawa - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
As an introduction to those here in Maven land, I'm the VP of Brand Management at the Apache Software Foundation, and I and my officer's committee at trademarks@ are responsible for setting brand policy for all Apache projects, including trademark usage by third parties. Since this includes comments specifically about Apache trademark policy, I thought it would be important to clarify or correct some things. People may be interested in reading Apache's formal trademark policy, as well as several other linked policies about domains, events, etc.: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ Jason van Zyl wrote: Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about. What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark Hadoop World. I believe these are significantly different things, and it is disingenuous to compare them as such. For one, Cloudera has worked constructively with the Apache Conferences Committee on the branding for their Hadoop World event, and actively and productively worked with Apache on securing the MOU; in fact it was recently updated and renewed for a second year by both sides. I have not seen the same kind of behavior on Sonatype's side on the core attribution issue. Secondly, event branding is a very different thing than services branding, especially in the case of Maven Central, where the service is such a central part of how our Maven software works. These service marks are for services provided to the community and not intended for commercial purposes. One could argue Hadoop World is a marketing event for Cloudera used to drive sales and raise awareness about Cloudera's involvement in Hadoop, but it's an event held for the community and it's free of charge. You'll notice that's it's not Apache Hadoop World, it's Hadoop World. You can see an example of the usage here: http://ostatic.com/blog/cloudera-announces-hadoop-world-and-hadoop-marches-on Since that's an OStatic news article, it's OStatic's responsibility, not Cloudera's. While news articles without sufficient attributions or link backs to Apache project's home pages are certainly an issue in terms of both the details of trademarks as well as the overall effect of their reputation, news articles are a fundamentally different thing than corporate homepages, or product or download pages. You will also note that what Sonatype is repeatedly accused of which is to use Maven and not Apache Maven you will notice in the link above Cloudera seems to be exempt from. Not a single mention of Apache Hadoop in that press release. Actually if you walk all over the Cloudera site you'll find similar, if not worse abuses, all over their site. Both the Hadoop PMC and trademarks@ welcome specific reports of third parties improperly using Apache marks by third parties. If it's a news article, like that OStatic article, then it's probably best to address it to press@ though. This all seems to be fine for Cloudera, a company founded by Doug Cutting who is on the Apache Board. Cloudera knows this and has been gradually fixing things, but they were granted an MOU for Hadoop World and no severe action was taken against Cloudera as a company. Apache is purportedly and organization based on the participation of individuals so really one wouldn't expect any targeted action against a company. Doug should know better than anyone how these things work, working toward and eventually becoming a member of the Apache Board. We also have the example http://www.tomcatexpert.com/ which also seems to be fine, and you'll note this original infraction occurred while Jim Jagielski was involved with SpringSource. Jim, as Doug, is on the Apache Board. The Apache board took no severe action in the case of TomcatExpert site. In both cases either trademarks@, concom@, or the relevant PMCs have been working with the third parties in question, and those third parties have responded constructively. These are not board issues; the board has delegated these responsibilities, and the board only steps in when necessary. Such as when a third party does not comply with requests. Now, I don't find any of the cases cited above as egregious misappropriation of Apache property, but simply a way for companies involved with Apache to get some recognition for the work they do and to promote their involvement with the projects they've helped make successful. These uses never particularly bothered me. What I take exception to is that the fact that grants of these exceptions seem selective, Apache policies regarding trademarks are made up on the fly, and that what other companies have been granted at Apache, Sonatype is not. I'm not quite sure how
[ANN] Maven EAR Plugin 2.6 Released
The Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the Maven EAR Plugin, version 2.6 This version brings mainly detection of application client archive managed by the recent maven-arc-plugin [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-ear-plugin/ You should specify the version in your project's plugin configuration: plugin groupIdorg.apache.maven.plugins/groupId artifactIdmaven-ear-plugin/artifactId version2.6/version /plugin Release Notes - Maven 2.x Ear Plugin - Version 2.6 ** Bug * [MEAR-139] - earSourceDirectory named in documentation as earSourcesDirectory ** New Feature * [MEAR-40] - Autodetect Client Application modules and EJB3 modules. * [MEAR-137] - Support for JEE Application Clients Enjoy, -The Maven team [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-acr-plugin/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: PMC change explanation?
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Jason, all I can say in response is that I am impressed with both your reinterpretation of history as well as the size of your stugots in somehow placing the blame on the board and myself. As I am impressed with yours. When things are not done in the open or documented everything can be left to interpretation and that's what's happened here. For months there have been back channel conversations, with the Maven PMC only being recently involved. The board gave the Maven PMC the power to negotiate and took that power away when they didn't like the results. Then the board proceeded to take unilateral action which excludes Sonatype from the project. I consider not being able to vote on anything related to the project being excluded from the project. During your negotiations with any other group about trademarks the board has never taken an action like this. An action many members of the ASF believe to run counter to what the ASF stands for. We have made incredible progress, and your sweeping and baseless arguments are impeding and damaging that. I would encourage you to, for the benefit of the community, restrain yourself. I think I have just cause for being mildly irritated and I don't think I'm saying anything that's unreasonable, and I'm trying to speak from my first hand experience. Again, because much of these conversations happened in back channels we are in the situation we are in. This is why I removed myself from the Maven PMC in January as I was frustrated, annoyed and hoped that if I were not present the negotiations would be expedited as I'm generally seen as holding some sway over Sonatype and legal trademark law in some mysterious way. I am speaking for myself (and not trying to represent Sonatype's view point in any way) and so I might not be privy to all information, but I believed that as an act of good faith individuals would be restored to the Maven PMC as part of the resolution process. I thought that would happen three weeks ago after your meeting with Wayne. I have been embroiled with the board in arguments about Maven since its inception many years ago, and I fear that conflict has fueled some of the behaviour from the board. I do not control Sonatype, nor do I hold sway over any of its employees and I believe all of them have truly acted in good faith and remained attentive to the discussions, especially Brian. The action taken was uncalled for and though there's a lot I might not agree with at Apache I think a line was crossed with respect to fairness toward people who have been many of the driving forces behind the Maven project. On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Jim, Your misunderstanding of someone else's point of view and dismissing it out of hand without any further discussion is what got us here in the first place. You have no problems ignoring whatever you feel like which generally makes it hard to arrive at a resolution. Your job as an ASF Board member is to facilitate discussion not stifle it. It is your repeated canceling of face to face meetings and lack of communication over the span of months that has left us where we are. You shirk your responsibility as the board member primarily responsible for this debacle and then basically refuse to be accountable by just saying you're going to ignore me. If you want to ignore me that's fine, but don't ignore the problem you've heavily contributed to forming. I don't need to be involved but the board, Mark Struberg (who appears to be responsible now from the Maven PMC side), Larry and Wayne can get this resolved with one call. Then it's done and we can move forward and do what's best for the Maven project and more importantly Maven users. On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The below shows that you are extremely out of touch regarding what has been going on. As such, I have no problems with ignoring it. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the board doesn't really care what happens to the Maven project. I think Sonatype has been reasonable, I think I can even dig up an email that says your legal counsel thinks we have been reasonable. Just put the issue to rest and one of you call Wayne. It's absurd that it's come to this. The Apache Board can put this issue to rest, or permanently screw the project. I don't think it's in anyone else's hands really except the Apache Board. On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: What Sonatype was seeking was the use of Maven Central as a service mark
Re: PMC change explanation?
Jason, Your synopsis is pretty much complete and total hogwash. Except for the board action, the PMC has been very, very involved for quite a long time. Since you are not on the PMC, maybe you didn't know that. In which case, please don't attempt to imagine what is happening; reality is sooo much more accurate. The PMC can choose to divulge anything it wants to... The truth is rarely as sexy as conspiracy ramblings are. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: release version 21 of the parent POM for maven plugins
Hey, a couple of more +1's would be handy here. On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, We solved 1 issues: ** Improvement * [MPOM-12] - Update maven-plugins to new org.apache.maven:maven-parent:20 There are no open JIRAs against the maven-plugins parent. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/pom/trunk/maven/pom.xml?r1=1135900r2=1135901diff_format=h Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-014/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-plugins-21/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: release version 21 of the parent POM for maven plugins
+1 On 6/14/11 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: Hi, We solved 1 issues: ** Improvement * [MPOM-12] - Update maven-plugins to new org.apache.maven:maven-parent:20 There are no open JIRAs against the maven-plugins parent. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/pom/trunk/maven/pom.xml?r1=1135900r2=1135901diff_format=h Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-014/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-plugins-21/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- John Casey Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org) Blog: http://www.johnofalltrades.name/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: release version 21 of the parent POM for maven plugins
+1 (note sure the diff link you provide is correct but I have review difference and sounds good). 2011/6/17 Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com: Hey, a couple of more +1's would be handy here. On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, We solved 1 issues: ** Improvement * [MPOM-12] - Update maven-plugins to new org.apache.maven:maven-parent:20 There are no open JIRAs against the maven-plugins parent. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/pom/trunk/maven/pom.xml?r1=1135900r2=1135901diff_format=h Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-014/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-plugins-21/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://www.linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Maven Verifier version 1.3
Hi, The vote has passed with the following result : +1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian I will promote the artifacts to the central repo. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Maven Remote Resources Plugin version 1.2.1
Hi, The vote has passed with the following result : +1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian I will promote the artifacts to the central repo. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[RESULT][VOTE] Release Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.9
Hi, The vote has passed with the following result : +1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian I will promote the artifacts to the central repo. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
