Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

Am 2017-02-09 um 21:30 schrieb Benson Margulies: How? When I declare a zip dependency on a non-reactor artifact, it is just zip. Packaging doesn't show up in , or is this what you are proposing? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-1683 The ZIP would have its own POM and lifecycle.

Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

How? When I declare a zip dependency on a non-reactor artifact, it is just zip. Packaging doesn't show up in , or is this what you are proposing? On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: > Am 2017-02-09 um 21:10 schrieb Benson Margulies: >> >> -1 to zips on the

Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

Am 2017-02-09 um 21:10 schrieb Benson Margulies: -1 to zips on the classpath. We need to disentangle the java classpath from the general concept of 'module X depends on module Y'. I created quite a lot of code that uses zips as containers to pass files from one place to another, and would be

Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

-1 to zips on the classpath. We need to disentangle the java classpath from the general concept of 'module X depends on module Y'. I created quite a lot of code that uses zips as containers to pass files from one place to another, and would be horribly broken if their transitive dependencies

Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

Am 2017-02-09 um 13:31 schrieb Robert Scholte: While thinking this all over, it is kind of strange that a type can decide for itself how it should be used. I thought about moving this info to the proper packaging-plugin, but that's not correct either, because e.g war and jar need to have the

Re: Re: Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

While thinking this all over, it is kind of strange that a type can decide for itself how it should be used. I thought about moving this info to the proper packaging-plugin, but that's not correct either, because e.g war and jar need to have the same logic. So in this case it is the

Re: Re: Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

> Now a ZIP packaging could do something different... we could have a > `classpath-zip` packaging with the extension type `zip` so then if you go > `classpath-zip` then Maven would know to look for a zip but > add it on the classpath. This looks overengineered to me. n types of ZIPs? We don't have

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

I have added some comments on the integration tests: https://github.com/apache/maven-integration-testing/commit/f9c0d641ae362ff59c76bc7eb670c8214917f0c3 On 9 February 2017 at 11:28, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 02/08/17 um 21:01 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > > I think all the

Re: Re: MNG-5567: Zips on classpath

Because if it lands in 4.0.0 then it will break existing POMs that have relied on ZIP files not being added to the classpath. Only when we get the PDT in 5.0.0 can we safely add them to the classpath... Now a ZIP packaging could do something different... we could have a `classpath-zip` packaging

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 02/08/17 um 21:01 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > I think all the important stuff is merged. I'll take a final review through > and then cut alpha-1 > > We can still add stuff if necessary for an alpha-2 but I'd much prefer to > focus that on shaking out bugs. > > Ideally we do at most 3 alpha's