I am torn on this as Brett clearly is.
I haven't contributed much code in quite a while. The reasons are simple. Maven
2 is stable but has serious issues that can't be fixed without breaking
compatibility. Maven 3 has been under development for years with parts being
ripped out and redone
On 4 August 2010 08:06, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I am torn on this as Brett clearly is.
I haven't contributed much code in quite a while. The reasons are simple.
Maven 2 is stable but has serious issues that can't be fixed without
breaking compatibility. Maven 3 has been
2010/8/4 Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com:
I share concerns with respect to where the code is hosted. I recognise that
as Apache is a meritocracy, there is a barrier for other developers getting
involved. The Hudson model of You want commit access, here you go is a
tad too
I have always had concerns about plexus being pretty much only adopted by
Maven as far as I can see, and essentially being a maven core component,
except it isn't
+1
Guice allready as its own large community of users and maintainers.
It's a general 'purpose' API.
Aether is new,
+1 : agree on having aether in asf too.
2010/8/4 Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com:
I am torn on this as Brett clearly is.
I haven't contributed much code in quite a while. The reasons are simple.
Maven 2 is stable but has serious issues that can't be fixed without
breaking
Hi,
In preparation of the Release Plugin release, I'd like to release Maven Scm 1.4.
We solved 22 issues :
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527version=16128
Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-064/
Staging sites (wait sync) :
Scm :
If anyone wants to -1 then you are free to do so.
I've given my reasoning for Aether not being here, I won't go on ad nauseum.
I'll leave it to the objectors to come up with a timeline for deciding. There's
no rush.
On Aug 4, 2010, at 5:03 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
+1 : agree on having aether
On Aug 4, 2010, at 4:00 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
On 4 August 2010 08:06, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I am torn on this as Brett clearly is.
I haven't contributed much code in quite a while. The reasons are simple.
Maven 2 is stable but has serious issues that can't
We can also all pop into IRC if you want a more productive, real-time
discussion. Also happy to host a call. Might as well get everything aired out
sooner rather then later.
On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:35 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Aug 4, 2010, at 4:00 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
On 4 August
I was saying that I see Guice as being different than Aether... the
plexus-guice shim though I see as being separate from Guice.
I also said that I recognise that the bar for egtting committer access at
apache is probably a little too high for something like Aether.
And, unlike others, I was
My experience is that a high barrier to committ access actually makes life
harder for committers. I have commit access to Maven but not to plexus
sometimes when working on Maven Plugins I've found I need to do something in
plexus to resolve an issue, and I've hit the wall because I have to
Although I am not a committer at Maven, I also share the sentiment that
Maven 3's external development hinders community development at Apache. It's
difficult to know where things are going -- and usually I feel the direction
is wholly controlled by Sonatype. I have no problems with commercial
2010/8/4 Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com:
If Aether has commit access for all Maven committers automatically, (and I'm
not saying it doesn't) then a large part of my concerns can be removed... I
recognise the p2 stuff as being a separate concern from the m2 repo
stuff and
On Aug 4, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
My experience is that a high barrier to committ access actually makes life
harder for committers. I have commit access to Maven but not to plexus
sometimes when working on Maven Plugins I've found I need to do something in
plexus to
On 4 August 2010 13:42, Henri Gomez henri.go...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/4 Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com:
If Aether has commit access for all Maven committers automatically, (and
I'm
not saying it doesn't) then a large part of my concerns can be removed...
I
recognise
I don't see any veto here.
Perso, I like this change (at least/especially the plexus-guice stuff).
Concerning the other part, I didn't work enough and don't have enough
time to work on this part of the project to have a clear idea.
As I haven't seen vote here , I push my +1.
And IMHO, earlier
On 4 August 2010 13:55, Jason van Zyl ja...@sonatype.com wrote:
On Aug 4, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
My experience is that a high barrier to committ access actually makes
life
harder for committers. I have commit access to Maven but not to
plexus
sometimes when
If the future of the repository is to be akin to p2 then I think
living at eclipse is the best place for it.
If it lives at eclipse then it has all IP concerned managed out of the
gates and companies are very comfortable with eclipse IP practices.
Living at eclipse it will likely be osgified out
I find your pronouncement that it won't be here very troubling since you only
have a single vote just as every other committer does.
Knowing you in person, I'll take the above with a grain of salt that
maybe it's not exactly what you meant. However my first reading of
this was alarming.
On 8/3/10 2:21 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We have two major pieces that we, Sonatype, would like to merge into Maven 3.x
trunk.
The first are the Guice changes that we've been talking about for a while, and
the second is the introduction of Aether which is our second attempt at a
Ivy Guys could be interested in such a neutral repository API, as they
also support both m2 and proprietary repo format.
2010/8/4 John Casey jdca...@commonjava.org
On 8/3/10 2:21 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We have two major pieces that we, Sonatype, would like to merge into Maven
3.x
On 8/4/10 10:39 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Ivy Guys could be interested in such a neutral repository API, as they
also support both m2 and proprietary repo format.
Is Ivy even active still?
I see Eclipse p2 as a better target for interoperability, but that's
beside the point.
We're talking
2010/8/4 Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com:
Alternatively, host the Aether API in one place (hey why not codehaus), the
Maven Repo impl in Apache and the p2 repo impl in Eclipse ;-)
Very good idea
-
To
Could it be supported by a JSR ?
Not a lightweight process, even considering JSR-330 was out after 6 month,
but the most agnostic way to group community efforts. Aether could then be
proposed as RI
2010/8/4 John Casey jdca...@commonjava.org
On 8/4/10 10:39 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Ivy Guys
On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:35 AM, John Casey wrote:
On 8/3/10 2:21 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We have two major pieces that we, Sonatype, would like to merge into Maven
3.x trunk.
The first are the Guice changes that we've been talking about for a while,
and the second is the
I'll try and sum up some things I expressed on IRC, in response to Brian's
message.
I'll be clear upfront that we have no right to tell Sonatype where they host
code they wrote, so let's focus on the impact for Maven itself. Equally so, no
matter how generous they are with a donation:
On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:04 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
I find your pronouncement that it won't be here very troubling since you
only have a single vote just as every other committer does.
Knowing you in person, I'll take the above with a grain of salt that
maybe it's not exactly what you meant.
I have/had a stable refactoring of SUREFIRE-592. Just have to find the
working copy where I had it and commit the changes. If I have not found it
by friday, we can push S-592 to the next release
-Stephen
On 29 July 2010 19:09, Paul Gier pg...@redhat.com wrote:
I'd like to get out the next
On 8/4/10 11:03 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:35 AM, John Casey wrote:
On 8/3/10 2:21 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We have two major pieces that we, Sonatype, would like to merge into Maven 3.x
trunk.
The first are the Guice changes that we've been talking about for a
On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:54 AM, John Casey wrote:
Having a stable set of specifications define their interaction with Maven
would make plugin development and embedding MUCH better. In fact, I think
establishing this practice might be the single best contribution we can
make to Maven in
I want it to be clear that the _only_ thing I asked for was that the
Aether API/SPI _specification_ be hosted in a neutral location where
Maven committers can contribute to the design.
Let me emphasize that: API/SPI only, and in a neutral location. The
Maven project is not what I'd call
Hi,
Here is my position about these proposals.
Guice : I understand it will replace the IOC part of plexus. More important
changes in Maven will be done in Maven (3.0) to fully use the JSR and Guice
itself. For now it is just a technical switch between IOC containers and we
need more real
The Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the Maven Doxia
Tools, version 1.1
Doxia Tools is a set of tools for working with Doxia documents. It
contains a Converter and a Linkchecker.
http://maven.apache.org/doxia/doxia-tools/
You should specify the version in your project's
Hi,
This is the first release of this plugin. There are no issues in JIRA.
If you want to see it in action, it has been configured in a profile
called linkcheck in the POM for the Maven site.
Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-066/
Staging site:
+1 from me - I assume us joe-shmoe users can vote?
--
Pull me down under...
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
In preparation of the Release Plugin release, I'd like to release Maven Scm
1.4.
We solved 22 issues :
Anyone can vote. The community vote is certainly important, but
official Apache policy requires a minimum of 3 PMC +1's.
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Mark Derricutt m...@talios.com wrote:
+1 from me - I assume us joe-shmoe users can vote?
--
Pull me down under...
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at
Hi Olivier,
Looks like patch for SCM-532 was incomplete in case of CVS providers,
so I've created new issue SCM-568 with attached patch. And it would be
really great to apply it before release. Is it possible?
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 14:11, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
In
Out of curiository - are the guice/aether changes available in separate
branches at all?
Can the guice stuff be merged in cleanly independent of aether? If so - I'd
like to see the guice code merged in, and deal with aether as a separate
thing.
--
Pull me down under...
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010
38 matches
Mail list logo
