Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
On 15 January 2012 11:11, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote: Le samedi 14 janvier 2012 20:22:15 Stephen Connolly a écrit : personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... +1 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... is there a Jira issue for this? Have not seen one specifically, the issue that is the RCA is http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452 From the latest comment http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452?focusedCommentId=285802page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-285802 you can see that 2.2.1 has issues (which I can confirm from my testing of versions-maven-plugin in preparation of it's 1.3 release i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus .org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven -shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 --**-- ** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apac he.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscribe@maven.apache .org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
On 16 January 2012 15:45, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 January 2012 11:11, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote: Le samedi 14 janvier 2012 20:22:15 Stephen Connolly a écrit : personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... +1 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... is there a Jira issue for this? Have not seen one specifically, the issue that is the RCA is http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452 From the latest comment http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452?focusedCommentId=285802page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-285802 you can see that 2.2.1 has issues (which I can confirm from my testing of versions-maven-plugin in preparation of it's 1.3 release You can also Google for: maven-metadata-public-snapshot.xml ': expected START_TAG or END_TAG not TEXT (position: TEXT seen That will list all the people complaining. To see this most easily, find your favorite Maven Plugin, using Maven 3.0.3 run mvn clean install on a -SNAPSHOT version using Maven 2.2.1 run mvn groupId:artifactId:version-SNAPSHOT:goal and watch the blow-up i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus .org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven -shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 --**-- ** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apac he.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscribe@maven.apache .org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
So what you're actually saying: Let's force people to NOT use Maven-2.1.0 of 2.2.0 by setting the prerequisite for maven to 2.2.1 And hence, we get the Doxia verison we want. That would solve two problems at once. -Robert On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:47:39 +0100, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 January 2012 15:45, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 January 2012 11:11, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote: Le samedi 14 janvier 2012 20:22:15 Stephen Connolly a écrit : personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... +1 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... is there a Jira issue for this? Have not seen one specifically, the issue that is the RCA is http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452 From the latest comment http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452?focusedCommentId=285802page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-285802 you can see that 2.2.1 has issues (which I can confirm from my testing of versions-maven-plugin in preparation of it's 1.3 release You can also Google for: maven-metadata-public-snapshot.xml ': expected START_TAG or END_TAG not TEXT (position: TEXT seen That will list all the people complaining. To see this most easily, find your favorite Maven Plugin, using Maven 3.0.3 run mvn clean install on a -SNAPSHOT version using Maven 2.2.1 run mvn groupId:artifactId:version-SNAPSHOT:goal and watch the blow-up i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus .org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven -shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 --**-- ** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apac he.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscribe@maven.apache .org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
Well actually I'd say force people to use 2.2.2 after rolling a 2.2.2 that does not barf on the 3.0.3 metadata in local repo... such a 2.2.2 does not need to understand the extra metadata, just not barf on it (i.e. copy the 2.2.1 tag, make the metadata forgiving, release 2.2.2 so that the changes are absolutely minimal) But other than that, yes that is my point On 16 January 2012 17:25, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: So what you're actually saying: Let's force people to NOT use Maven-2.1.0 of 2.2.0 by setting the prerequisite for maven to 2.2.1 And hence, we get the Doxia verison we want. That would solve two problems at once. -Robert On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:47:39 +0100, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 January 2012 15:45, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 January 2012 11:11, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote: Le samedi 14 janvier 2012 20:22:15 Stephen Connolly a écrit : personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... +1 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... is there a Jira issue for this? Have not seen one specifically, the issue that is the RCA is http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452 From the latest comment http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4452?focusedCommentId=285802page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-285802 you can see that 2.2.1 has issues (which I can confirm from my testing of versions-maven-plugin in preparation of it's 1.3 release You can also Google for: maven-metadata-public-snapshot.xml ': expected START_TAG or END_TAG not TEXT (position: TEXT seen That will list all the people complaining. To see this most easily, find your favorite Maven Plugin, using Maven 3.0.3 run mvn clean install on a -SNAPSHOT version using Maven 2.2.1 run mvn groupId:artifactId:version-SNAPSHOT:goal and watch the blow-up i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus .org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven -shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
Le samedi 14 janvier 2012 20:22:15 Stephen Connolly a écrit : personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... +1 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... is there a Jira issue for this? i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus .org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven -shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 --**-- ** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apac he.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscribe@maven.apache .org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 Now that Java 1.5 has already seen EOL for some years it is funny that most plugins even are still working with 1.4. Regards Mirko -- Sent from my phone http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com http://github.com/mfriedenhagen/ https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/ On Jan 12, 2012 12:22 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: I tend to feel that this community is a bit whelmed, and that we'd do better service to the world at large if we drew a line in the sand at 2.2.1. Anyone who really wants new functionality with older core maven can step up and volunteer to maintain branches of plugins. On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
personally i think we need to draw a line in the sand for all plugins... 2.2.1 is the best line at the moment imho... 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 are not recommended versions, and drawing a line above them makes our message to users that much cleaner. the only other thing we maybe should do is roll a 2.2.2 that doesn't bomb out if 3.0.3 has pulled snapshot dependencies into the same local repo... i may look into that myself... i think it would be fine for it to ignore that extra xml entries in the metadata (least change in behaviour) so only change from 2.2.1 would be the more relaxed metadata parsing... if anyone knows any criticals i would more likely see those in a 2.2.3 or 2.3 ie i wouldn't be release manager for such a release ;-) - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 14 Jan 2012 15:45, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: I've fixed MCHECKSTYLE-170 and tried to apply some shading. The separation of api/interfaces versus implementation is not done well in Doxia. This would mean, that the shade-plugin will need a lot of configuration, which also needs to be maintained if there are new Doxia-classes. So for plugins with only reporting-goals the requirement for Maven-2.2.1 seems to be the best solution. -Robert On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:10:45 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/**browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/**plugins/maven-shade-plugin/** examples/class-relocation.htmlhttp://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.**orgdev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 Le mercredi 11 janvier 2012 18:22:29 Benson Margulies a écrit : I tend to feel that this community is a bit whelmed, and that we'd do better service to the world at large if we drew a line in the sand at 2.2.1. Anyone who really wants new functionality with older core maven can step up and volunteer to maintain branches of plugins. On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
On 2012-01-13 20:43, Robert Scholte wrote: My guess would be that with relocation it wouldn't matter.[1] I'd like to confirm this with the maven-checkstyle-plugin project, but unfortunately a lot of unit-tests are failing on my machine (win7 + jdk6 + any M2/M3) I can confirm these test errors and failures on Win 7, Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3. On Ubuntu with Java 5 and Maven 2.2.1/3.0.3 it works though. Created an issue in JIRA to track it: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-170 -Robert [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/examples/class-relocation.html On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:59:36 +0100, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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 -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
Hi Can it work? I haven't had much experience with shading, but I was under the impression that it is a way to hide classes from Maven's class loader. What we really want in this case is a way to *insert* newer versions of classes into Maven's class loader. Don't know if that can be done... On 2012-01-12 00:12, Robert Scholte wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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 -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
Hi I've had a look at this issue in the Checkstyle Plugin http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-146 The issue is not unique to the Checkstyle Plugin, but rather any plugin that uses Doxia 1.1.x or newer. That means at least all reporting plugins. I've verified it on the PMD Plugin that I am working on. All Maven 2 versions come with a bundled Doxia version. This means that it is locked and cannot use newer versions of Doxia. Most current reporting plugins use Doxia 1.1.x which was introduced in Maven 2.1.0. Maven version prior to that cannot use Doxia 1.1 features like Doxia Logging. So when a reporting plugin using Doxia 1.1 is invoked by Maven 2.0.x there is a high probability that it will crash, in a way similar to what is described in the above issue. To remedy this I propose that all plugins that use Doxia 1.1+ has its Maven prerequisite set to 2.2.1. Why not 2.1.0 or 2.2.0 you may ask? Well, we don't want people to use them because Maven 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 produce incorrect GPG signatures and checksums respectively. Comments? This is something that can be done one plugin at a time, when it's due for release. We should register JIRA issues for each plugin stating the updated Maven prerequisite, to make the change visible to our users. -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
Hi Some background on Maven and Doxia versions and compatibility can be found here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Doxia+Release+Plan On 2012-01-11 23:22, Dennis Lundberg wrote: Hi I've had a look at this issue in the Checkstyle Plugin http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-146 The issue is not unique to the Checkstyle Plugin, but rather any plugin that uses Doxia 1.1.x or newer. That means at least all reporting plugins. I've verified it on the PMD Plugin that I am working on. All Maven 2 versions come with a bundled Doxia version. This means that it is locked and cannot use newer versions of Doxia. Most current reporting plugins use Doxia 1.1.x which was introduced in Maven 2.1.0. Maven version prior to that cannot use Doxia 1.1 features like Doxia Logging. So when a reporting plugin using Doxia 1.1 is invoked by Maven 2.0.x there is a high probability that it will crash, in a way similar to what is described in the above issue. To remedy this I propose that all plugins that use Doxia 1.1+ has its Maven prerequisite set to 2.2.1. Why not 2.1.0 or 2.2.0 you may ask? Well, we don't want people to use them because Maven 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 produce incorrect GPG signatures and checksums respectively. Comments? This is something that can be done one plugin at a time, when it's due for release. We should register JIRA issues for each plugin stating the updated Maven prerequisite, to make the change visible to our users. -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 11 Jan 2012 22:23, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org wrote: Hi I've had a look at this issue in the Checkstyle Plugin http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-146 The issue is not unique to the Checkstyle Plugin, but rather any plugin that uses Doxia 1.1.x or newer. That means at least all reporting plugins. I've verified it on the PMD Plugin that I am working on. All Maven 2 versions come with a bundled Doxia version. This means that it is locked and cannot use newer versions of Doxia. Most current reporting plugins use Doxia 1.1.x which was introduced in Maven 2.1.0. Maven version prior to that cannot use Doxia 1.1 features like Doxia Logging. So when a reporting plugin using Doxia 1.1 is invoked by Maven 2.0.x there is a high probability that it will crash, in a way similar to what is described in the above issue. To remedy this I propose that all plugins that use Doxia 1.1+ has its Maven prerequisite set to 2.2.1. Why not 2.1.0 or 2.2.0 you may ask? Well, we don't want people to use them because Maven 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 produce incorrect GPG signatures and checksums respectively. Comments? This is something that can be done one plugin at a time, when it's due for release. We should register JIRA issues for each plugin stating the updated Maven prerequisite, to make the change visible to our users. -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. Can you elaborate on the problem? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
I tend to feel that this community is a bit whelmed, and that we'd do better service to the world at large if we drew a line in the sand at 2.2.1. Anyone who really wants new functionality with older core maven can step up and volunteer to maintain branches of plugins. On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 11 Jan 2012 23:22, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: I tend to feel that this community is a bit whelmed, and that we'd do better service to the world at large if we drew a line in the sand at 2.2.1. Anyone who really wants new functionality with older core maven can step up and volunteer to maintain branches of plugins. On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
we should maybe roll a 2.3 where the fix is being aware of the new snapshot metadata so that people who have projects not ready for 3.0.4 can have them coexist. - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 11 Jan 2012 23:22, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: I tend to feel that this community is a bit whelmed, and that we'd do better service to the world at large if we drew a line in the sand at 2.2.1. Anyone who really wants new functionality with older core maven can step up and volunteer to maintain branches of plugins. On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Robert Scholte apa...@sourcegrounds.com wrote: What about plugins containing both build and report goals? If the suggested shading of Doxia will work, I'd prefer that option. -Robert On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:53:57 +0100, Barrie Treloar baerr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote: +1 +1 - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 Den 11. jan. 2012 kl. 23:23 skrev Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org: Hi I've had a look at this issue in the Checkstyle Plugin http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-146 The issue is not unique to the Checkstyle Plugin, but rather any plugin that uses Doxia 1.1.x or newer. That means at least all reporting plugins. I've verified it on the PMD Plugin that I am working on. All Maven 2 versions come with a bundled Doxia version. This means that it is locked and cannot use newer versions of Doxia. Most current reporting plugins use Doxia 1.1.x which was introduced in Maven 2.1.0. Maven version prior to that cannot use Doxia 1.1 features like Doxia Logging. So when a reporting plugin using Doxia 1.1 is invoked by Maven 2.0.x there is a high probability that it will crash, in a way similar to what is described in the above issue. To remedy this I propose that all plugins that use Doxia 1.1+ has its Maven prerequisite set to 2.2.1. Why not 2.1.0 or 2.2.0 you may ask? Well, we don't want people to use them because Maven 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 produce incorrect GPG signatures and checksums respectively. Comments? This is something that can be done one plugin at a time, when it's due for release. We should register JIRA issues for each plugin stating the updated Maven prerequisite, to make the change visible to our users. -- Dennis Lundberg - 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: [PROPOSAL] Reporting plugins should require Maven 2.2.1
+1 -- Olivier Le 11 janv. 2012 23:23, Dennis Lundberg denn...@apache.org a écrit : Hi I've had a look at this issue in the Checkstyle Plugin http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-146 The issue is not unique to the Checkstyle Plugin, but rather any plugin that uses Doxia 1.1.x or newer. That means at least all reporting plugins. I've verified it on the PMD Plugin that I am working on. All Maven 2 versions come with a bundled Doxia version. This means that it is locked and cannot use newer versions of Doxia. Most current reporting plugins use Doxia 1.1.x which was introduced in Maven 2.1.0. Maven version prior to that cannot use Doxia 1.1 features like Doxia Logging. So when a reporting plugin using Doxia 1.1 is invoked by Maven 2.0.x there is a high probability that it will crash, in a way similar to what is described in the above issue. To remedy this I propose that all plugins that use Doxia 1.1+ has its Maven prerequisite set to 2.2.1. Why not 2.1.0 or 2.2.0 you may ask? Well, we don't want people to use them because Maven 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 produce incorrect GPG signatures and checksums respectively. Comments? This is something that can be done one plugin at a time, when it's due for release. We should register JIRA issues for each plugin stating the updated Maven prerequisite, to make the change visible to our users. -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
