hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-983710755
> The choice for `script` was because in general we don't want binaries in
the SCM. There's no real damage if the file is committed anyway.
making script the
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-983699652
ok, code pushed in MWRPPER-14 branch in maven-studies
https://github.com/apache/maven-studies/tree/MWRAPPER-14
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-980644191
thinking at default type more in depth, I think that I now understand the
logic
= making `script` the default is not sufficient, because if
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-980641749
but for sure, there is the question: what should be the default? current
`script`or `bin`?
I kept the `script` default value that Robert chose previously, changing
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-980639933
the issue you have is only with SNAPSHOTs or maven-wrapper, that are
obvioulsy not published to central
But with releases, there won't be any problem for normal
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-980543639
last try:
- code = https://github.com/hboutemy/maven-wrapper = the initial wrapper
donation with 4 commits to switch to Apache, replace provisio to assembly, add
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-974609919
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-974664732
wrong logic: not merging MWRAPPER-14 (and not releasing a usable wrapper)
does not help on evolving with MWRAPPER-16
please think again: scripts released as part
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-974609919
ok, so no objection to merge this PR?
please approve it
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-962566868
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MWRAPPER-16 to track this
very good idea on `mvnw` launching `mvn` scripts: I hope we'll find a solution
some day
--
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-952594433
oh, yes, sorry, please forget my previous comment: morning coffe took more
time than I expected to warm up my brain :)
Yes, having `mvnw` script (stored in
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-952568787
yes, instead of copying by hand partial scripts from
https://github.com/apache/maven/tree/master/apache-maven/src/assembly/shared to
current project source
hboutemy commented on pull request #1:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/maven-wrapper-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-951301704
I completely value the work done to sync mvn and mvnw: syncing is just about
copying the 6 partial scripts.
on releasing, there is only 1 simultaneous release
13 matches
Mail list logo
