Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
Vincent Siveton wrote: I proposed to remove officially org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for the 1.0 (DOXIA-146). WDYT? This interface is still referenced by MavenReport from the maven-reporting-api. Hence it seems removing it would require a new reporting API when Doxia 1.0 is integrated into Maven. Not sure how much havoc that causes to all the reporting Maven plugins out there. Benjamin
Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
I can't remember if it was also overloaded with the new package name and some plugins were transitioned to that or not. If that's not the case, the only trick I could think of is having the plugin classloader modify references on the fly... :) - Brett On 15/12/2008, at 10:10 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote: Vincent Siveton wrote: I proposed to remove officially org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for the 1.0 (DOXIA-146). WDYT? This interface is still referenced by MavenReport from the maven- reporting-api. Hence it seems removing it would require a new reporting API when Doxia 1.0 is integrated into Maven. Not sure how much havoc that causes to all the reporting Maven plugins out there. Benjamin -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
Sorry, I did a mistake due the new versioning :) I speak to remove it in doxia 1.1 for Maven 2.1.x (with Doxia 1.1.x). Vincent 2008/12/14 Vincent Siveton vincent.sive...@gmail.com: Hi guys, I proposed to remove officially org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for the 1.0 (DOXIA-146). WDYT? Vincent
Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
2008/12/14 Benjamin Bentmann benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu: Vincent Siveton wrote: I proposed to remove officially org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for the 1.0 (DOXIA-146). WDYT? This interface is still referenced by MavenReport from the maven-reporting-api. Hence it seems removing it would require a new reporting API when Doxia 1.0 is integrated into Maven. Not sure how much havoc that causes to all the reporting Maven plugins out there. Agree with you for maven 2.0.x but for maven 2.1.x I think it is possible. Vincent Benjamin
Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
On 15/12/2008, at 10:21 AM, Vincent Siveton wrote: 2008/12/14 Benjamin Bentmann benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu: Vincent Siveton wrote: I proposed to remove officially org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for the 1.0 (DOXIA-146). WDYT? This interface is still referenced by MavenReport from the maven-reporting-api. Hence it seems removing it would require a new reporting API when Doxia 1.0 is integrated into Maven. Not sure how much havoc that causes to all the reporting Maven plugins out there. Agree with you for maven 2.0.x but for maven 2.1.x I think it is possible. You will need to at least introduce the overloaded method into 2.0.x and deprecate the old one... but again this might cause problems for anyone using the interface and not the AbstractMavenReport. Perhaps a better approach can be found that can isolate the classloading of different versions in the Core so that the change can be made directly. - Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Removed org.codehaus.doxia.sink.Sink for 1.0
Hi Brett, 2008/12/14 Brett Porter br...@apache.org: You will need to at least introduce the overloaded method into 2.0.x and deprecate the old one... but again this might cause problems for anyone using the interface and not the AbstractMavenReport. We have already a coupling pb between Maven and Doxia. See MNG-3402. Perhaps a better approach can be found that can isolate the classloading of different versions in the Core so that the change can be made directly. Sounds like better for me. It is a Maven pb, not a Doxia one. Cheers, Vincent
