Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

Am 08/31/16 um 22:51 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > So for the tests-jar.., that would have a declared dependency on the > regular .jar and provide the tree for the test-runtime scope... It may even > be that there are therefore closer overrides of the main artifact's > dependencies in the test jar's

Re: Questions about how to contribute to Plexus

Hi Robert: Regarding Plexus components, I created a couple of pull requests on plexus-interpolator (and some related maven-filtering patches). I have a few free hours this week that I could use to merge those PR to speed up a new release. Is it possible to assign me write permission to that repo?

Re: JUnit categories in surefire/failsafe

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:43 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > >>One thing we noticed was that the user property is the same for both > plugins. > We are aware of this and we will break the backwards compatibility. > This change is planned in Surefire 3.0. > I am thinking of

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Agree with Andreas, I can see MRJars usefulness too. APIs with lambdas come to mind as a good example, or interfaces with default implementations, are just a couple features of Java8 which I've avoided adding because of needing backward compatibility. Eclipse's maven support in general is

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 22:02:04 +0200, Tibor Digana wrote: So, we can try to have different source folders for different runtimes. No. If you are developers you would not say this. No developer would develop and merge the same code multiple times!!! Look, now let

Re: JUnit categories in surefire/failsafe

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:23 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > Some offtopic. I will answer your email but first I have a question for you > and Accumulo project. > I visited Accumulo cca one week ago. Why the build [1] hangs on IT test > executed by

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

2016-08-31 22:02 GMT+02:00 Tibor Digana : > >>So, we can try to have different source folders for different runtimes. > No. If you are developers you would not say this. > No developer would develop and merge the same code multiple times!!! > Look, now let the

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

On Wednesday 31 August 2016, Robert Scholte wrote: > On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:35:02 +0200, Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 31 August 2016, Christian Schulte wrote: >> >> Am 08/31/16 um 18:39 schrieb Christian

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

>>So, we can try to have different source folders for different runtimes. No. If you are developers you would not say this. No developer would develop and merge the same code multiple times!!! Look, now let the maven-compiler-plugin to download jars of the same artifact which was released for

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:35:02 +0200, Stephen Connolly wrote: On Wednesday 31 August 2016, Christian Schulte wrote: Am 08/31/16 um 18:39 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 08/31/16 um 07:52 schrieb Stephen Connolly: >> I've been thinking about

Re: maven-cucumber-reporting Build failure

I was able to dig up a solution for now so please ignore this email for now. If I have any further questions I will reach back out again..hopefully not. Thanks for your help =) On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Kashif BHATTI wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am running a

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

Am 08/31/16 um 19:35 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > On Wednesday 31 August 2016, Christian Schulte wrote: >> >> >> public interface DependencyTreeProvider >> { >> >> DependencyNode getDependencyTree( String logicalScopeName ) >> throws IOException; >> >> } > > > Not `String

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Hi Paul - I certainly believe you that you've thought this through alot further than I have. :-) I'm just speaking about a general sense of striving towards keeping the projects as simple as possible. I think that sometimes its a bit too easy to state that some build pattern should just be

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

On Wednesday 31 August 2016, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 08/31/16 um 18:39 schrieb Christian Schulte: > > Am 08/31/16 um 07:52 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > >> I've been thinking about what to call the "consumer Pom"... > >> > >> I think this is actually not a project object

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

Am 08/31/16 um 18:39 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 08/31/16 um 07:52 schrieb Stephen Connolly: >> I've been thinking about what to call the "consumer Pom"... >> >> I think this is actually not a project object model, but the project >> dependency trees >> >> It should list each side artifact and

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

Am 08/31/16 um 07:52 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > I've been thinking about what to call the "consumer Pom"... > > I think this is actually not a project object model, but the project > dependency trees > > It should list each side artifact and their dependency trees... > > So for example: > > *

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Richard, I share your sentiment. I've given this subject some thought and I've come to the conclusion that a full project life cycle for each Java version is necessary for good measure. You will want to write main and test code for each class. IDEs treat individual projects as wholly contained so

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Understood. I guess it wouldn't be horrible if it required a multi-module maven project but I would still prefer to avoid introducing a requirement for multi-module projects anywhere. Richard Sand | CEO IDF Connect, Inc. 2207 Concord Ave, #359 Wilmington | Delaware 19803 | USA Office: +1 888

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

To be clear, I was purely addressing the concern of a Multi-Release JAR. Cheers, Paul On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Richard Sand wrote: > I definitely concur with Robert's point: "I don't think we make developers > very happy if they are advised to have a multimodule

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

I definitely concur with Robert's point: "I don't think we make developers very happy if they are advised to have a multimodule project just to be able to compile the module-info file.". I can live with the requirement that I must run Maven with Java9 to support creating module-info and

Re: POM Model version 4.1.0 in 3.4.0-SNAPSHOTs

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 07:52:20 +0200, Stephen Connolly wrote: I've been thinking about what to call the "consumer Pom"... I think this is actually not a project object model, but the project dependency trees It should list each side artifact and their

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Hi Paul, no problem to move it to this thread. It is indeed about "The Maven Way", although we may need to start from the beginning, explaining the issue we're facing. Let's use ASM as an example, their 6.0_ALPHA has been built like this, although without Maven. ASM is an all purpose

Re: Building jar targeting multiple Java versions, including 9

Robert, I'm responding to dev@maven so we can discuss Maven philosophies... I believe the pattern should be based on a multi-module project. Each module should target the expected JDK version. Then introduce a new "mrjar" type for the parent that knows how to bind them all together into a

Re: JUnit categories in surefire/failsafe

>>One thing we noticed was that the user property is the same for both plugins. We are aware of this and we will break the backwards compatibility. This change is planned in Surefire 3.0. I am thinking of temporary fix but better not to do it. Please reference and use these user/properties since

Re: JUnit categories in surefire/failsafe

Hi Christopher, Some offtopic. I will answer your email but first I have a question for you and Accumulo project. I visited Accumulo cca one week ago. Why the build [1] hangs on IT test executed by maven-failsafe-plugin:2.19.1? I asked INFRA team to display Thread Dump button. Do you see this