makes sense to me.
Robert
On 30-5-2020 22:56:19, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
any objection that I create a new maven-artifact-plugin Git repository
initialized with current maven-buildinfo-plugin Git history?
Regards,
Hervé
Le mercredi 27 mai 2020, 19:26:55 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :
>
any objection that I create a new maven-artifact-plugin Git repository
initialized with current maven-buildinfo-plugin Git history?
Regards,
Hervé
Le mercredi 27 mai 2020, 19:26:55 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :
> maven-studies are just a sandbox, experimental code. Once it has a good
> shape,
maven-studies are just a sandbox, experimental code. Once it has a good shape,
it can be promoted to a separate project.
So no, we're not going to release the maven-buildinfo-plugin.
Robert
On 26-5-2020 23:17:29, Konrad Windszus wrote:
As creating a new maven-artifact-plugin will probably take
As creating a new maven-artifact-plugin will probably take some time, maybe it
would be possible to push a release build of
https://github.com/apache/maven-studies/tree/maven-buildinfo-plugin to Maven
Central. Or is there already a rough schedule for coming up with the new
yes, I saw that the main artifact is reproducible, but there are more subtle
cases with attached artifacts (-sources.jar and -source-release.zip)
If you build with run-its profile, you'll see that the pom.xml injected into
these artifacts has less differences: there is still the current
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with Maven: I
wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the same binaries as
the reference binaries published either to staging or to Central repository.
For a live
please "git pull": you're one commit behind HEAD
https://github.com/apache/maven-studies/commits/maven-buildinfo-plugin
- Mail original -
De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
À: "Maven Developers List" , "Hervé BOUTEMY"
Envoyé: Samedi 7 Mars 202
unpack and get (without transitive dependencies) are candidates to me.
Having extra goals makes the plugin more interesting.
Robert
On 8-3-2020 23:25:11, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
clearly, save goal is not a good choice: buildinfo would be better
I know buildinfo is not a usual term, but it's
Hmm, thinking out loud but cant a reproducible build check just build the
project twice staging locally first artifacts and comparing second pass
outputs to the staged ones?
Le dim. 8 mars 2020 à 23:25, Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit :
> clearly, save goal is not a good choice: buildinfo would be better
clearly, save goal is not a good choice: buildinfo would be better
I know buildinfo is not a usual term, but it's widely used in Reproducible
Builds [1] & [2], then it would be nice us Maven not to reinvent a wheel that
has already been invented
on separating checking, I really don't see how
I'm thinking of maven-artifact-plugin, having goals related to artifacts.
That implies that the save goal should be renamed.
A couple of goals of the maven-dependency-plugin are actually more
artifact-related are might be worth moving.
Robert
On 8-3-2020 13:44:07, Michael Osipov wrote:
Am
Il Dom 8 Mar 2020, 13:44 Michael Osipov ha scritto:
> Am 2020-03-08 um 12:48 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
> > Le dimanche 8 mars 2020, 00:31:07 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
> >> Am 2020-03-07 um 19:04 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
> >>> Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 17:39:20 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
> This
Am 2020-03-08 um 12:48 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Le dimanche 8 mars 2020, 00:31:07 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
Am 2020-03-07 um 19:04 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 17:39:20 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
This is expected because I am on 1.8.0_242. I don't have Java 7
installed
Le dimanche 8 mars 2020, 00:31:07 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
> Am 2020-03-07 um 19:04 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
> > Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 17:39:20 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
> >> This is expected because I am on 1.8.0_242. I don't have Java 7
> >> installed anymore on the server.
> >
> > for
On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 11:39 AM Michael Osipov wrote:
>
> As note, reproducibility after some time is not always possible if
> nessary compilers/tools aren't available anymore -- as you can see.
>
That's an important point. Some organizations archive their entire
build chain including compilers
Diff on OpenJDK 11:
├── META-INF/MANIFEST.MF
│ @@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
│ Manifest-Version: 1.0
│ +Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation^M
│ +Implementation-Title: Apache Maven Site Plugin^M
│ +Implementation-Version: 3.9.0^M
│ +Build-Jdk-Spec: 1.7^M
│ +Specification-Vendor: The Apache
Am 2020-03-07 um 19:04 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 17:39:20 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
This is expected because I am on 1.8.0_242. I don't have Java 7
installed anymore on the server.
for the discussion I wanted us to have, just being able to test and see how we
detect
Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 17:39:20 CET Michael Osipov a écrit :
> This is expected because I am on 1.8.0_242. I don't have Java 7
> installed anymore on the server.
for the discussion I wanted us to have, just being able to test and see how we
detect issues, this is perfect, isn't it?
how did you
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with Maven: I
wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the same binaries as
the reference binaries published either to staging or to Central repository.
For a live
thank you for testing
little bug fixed: stupid me, I should have tested this case before asking for
feedback: I tested only with central repository, provided as "central" id...
please fetch the latest plugin update and retest :)
Le samedi 7 mars 2020, 13:12:08 CET Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit :
Hi,
On 07.03.20 14:19, Michael Osipov wrote:
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with
Maven: I wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the
same binaries as the reference binaries published either to
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with Maven: I
wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the same binaries as
the reference binaries published either to staging or to Central repository.
For a live
Am 2020-03-07 um 13:45 schrieb Michael Osipov:
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with
Maven: I wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the
same binaries as the reference binaries published either
Am 2020-03-07 um 11:36 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with Maven: I
wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the same binaries as
the reference binaries published either to staging or to Central repository.
For a live
Am 2020-03-07 um 13:12 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
Hi Hervé,
I've tried to check my release via the suggested recipe...
Downloaded the maven-studies repo and build the following commit:
90b426758363123af6fcc9aa7190b837c0551359 (mvn clean install)
Downloaded the source package
curl -O
Hi Hervé,
I've tried to check my release via the suggested recipe...
Downloaded the maven-studies repo and build the following commit:
90b426758363123af6fcc9aa7190b837c0551359 (mvn clean install)
Downloaded the source package
curl -O
Hi,
Yesterday, I made a key step forward for Reproducible Builds with Maven: I
wrote code to easily check that your local build produces the same binaries as
the reference binaries published either to staging or to Central repository.
For a live example, see the last paragraph of Maven Site
27 matches
Mail list logo
