Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

You are right, I was using the old version of the test project. The latest version does work with 3.4 and does make sense. Thank you for the explanation. -- Regards, Igor On Sat, Nov 19, 2016, at 09:36 PM, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 11/20/16 um 03:28 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > > I am sorry, C

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/20/16 um 03:28 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > I am sorry, Christian, I must be missing something obvious. When I try > building the IT project you suggested as an expect of correct parent > version usage [1] I get the error below when using current 3.4 master. > Are you able to build the project s

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

I am sorry, Christian, I must be missing something obvious. When I try building the IT project you suggested as an expect of correct parent version usage [1] I get the error below when using current 3.4 master. Are you able to build the project successfully? [INFO] Scanning for projects... [ERROR

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/20/16 um 02:56 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 11/20/16 um 00:12 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: >> Let me rephrase my question. What IT shows how to use parent version >> ranges with Maven 3.4? > > MNG-2199 > >

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

When implementing parent version ranges, I also noticed MNG-5840. I did not know what to do about it because there has been comments around stating that the version is ingored intentionally somehow. I thought it is intentional the local parent resolution is ignoring the version element and did not

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/20/16 um 00:12 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > Let me rephrase my question. What IT shows how to use parent version > ranges with Maven 3.4? MNG-2199

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Given all the bugs I found in parent version ranges, it would not surprise me if it had previously been appearing to work as long as you have a full reactor, but using -pl to slice and dice the reactor or building individual modules by cd-ing into them But anyway YMMV On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 23:12,

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Let me rephrase my question. What IT shows how to use parent version ranges with Maven 3.4? We actually use parent version ranges quite extensively internally, so I am trying to assess the impact of 3.4 changes for our users. -- Regards, Igor On Sat, Nov 19, 2016, at 05:57 PM, Christian Schulte

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/19/16 um 23:57 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 11/19/16 um 13:35 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: >> What is parent version range syntax that works with 3.4? Or you are >> saying parent version ranges are not supported at all now? To not confuse anyone. The parent version range feature is not about s

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/19/16 um 13:35 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > What is parent version range syntax that works with 3.4? Or you are > saying parent version ranges are not supported at all now? They got introduced in 3.2.2. This commit

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

What is parent version range syntax that works with 3.4? Or you are saying parent version ranges are not supported at all now? -- Regards, Igor On Fri, Nov 18, 2016, at 10:57 PM, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 11/19/16 um 03:58 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > > Thank you for the analysis of the IT fail

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/19/16 um 03:58 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > Thank you for the analysis of the IT failures, Christian. I have a few > questions/observations, if you don't mind > > MavenITmng2199ParentVersionRangeTest.testValidLocalParentVersionRange > From what I can tell, module uses parent version=[1.0,2) whi

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/19/16 um 03:58 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > Thank you for the analysis of the IT failures, Christian. I have a few > questions/observations, if you don't mind > > MavenITmng2199ParentVersionRangeTest.testValidLocalParentVersionRange > From what I can tell, module uses parent version=[1.0,2) whi

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Thank you for the analysis of the IT failures, Christian. I have a few questions/observations, if you don't mind MavenITmng2199ParentVersionRangeTest.testValidLocalParentVersionRange >From what I can tell, module uses parent version=[1.0,2) which matches locally available parent version=1.1. Can y

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 21:43 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: >> FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current >> maven master and got this >> >>> Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 >> >> Running the same test checkout with Mav

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current > maven master and got this > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 > > Running the same test checkout with Maven 3.3.9 > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 0, Errors: 0

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current ^^ Running this commit against 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT now locally. I expect some ITs to fail. There have been updates to a few tests adding a

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current > maven master and got this > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 > > Running the same test checkout with Maven 3.3.9 > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 0, Errors: 0

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 23:56 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 11/15/16 um 23:41 schrieb Jason van Zyl: >> Almost none of the changes are well documented, there’s no release notes, >> we’ve told you to roll back or stop making behavioral changes. Put another way. Please take a look at the following constan

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/15/16 um 23:41 schrieb Jason van Zyl: > Almost none of the changes are well documented, there’s no release notes, > we’ve told you to roll back or stop making behavioral changes. Do you notice how many times I reverted things, changed things, re-reverted things, tried it in a backwards comp

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 21:43 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: >> FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current >> maven master and got this >> >>> Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 >> >> Running the same test checkout with Mav

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/17/16 um 06:00 schrieb Igor Fedorenko: > FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current > maven master and got this > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 > > Running the same test checkout with Maven 3.3.9 > >> Tests run: 771, Failures: 0, Errors: 0

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

On 17 November 2016 at 14:36, Jason van Zyl wrote: > Hyperbole easily made fact so let’s ask and then there will be no > question. I have thousands of users in my organization, Igor likely has > something similar. We don’t work together on a daily basis anymore but > small changes have a dire imp

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Hyperbole easily made fact so let’s ask and then there will be no question. I have thousands of users in my organization, Igor likely has something similar. We don’t work together on a daily basis anymore but small changes have a dire impact and both of us care greatly about the preservation and

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Jason, your hyperbole has slipped again. There is no need to make assertions about how many or what kind of users other developers have worked with, as that both does not foster the community and deflects from the valid point you were otherwise making. Christian has done the right thing in seeking

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

FWIW, I ran maven integration tests (commit 73a2b7) against current maven master and got this > Tests run: 771, Failures: 3, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0 Running the same test checkout with Maven 3.3.9 > Tests run: 771, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 -- Regards, Igor On Wed, Nov 16, 2016, at 1

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

So have you not asked, after committing changes, if something should not be rolled back? If you can take the integration tests from the commit right after the 3.3.9 release and Maven master works against that I’ll be perfectly satisfied that we will not be breaking the user base. > On Nov 15, 2

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

To sum it up. I've asked the very same question a few weeks ago. That has lead to creating that maven-3.x-next branch. A few weeks later I get a different answer and that branch becomes obsolete and all JIRA issues for version 3.5.0 need updating and the branch can be deleted, because it became mea

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/16/16 um 00:42 schrieb Christian Schulte: > tracked with. Can we please line up all of this with everyone and with > whatever changes others have in mind. By this I mean the following. If the import scope behaviour cannot be changed to what was done for MNG-5971 in any Maven 3.x version and

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/15/16 um 23:41 schrieb Jason van Zyl: > > You obviously don’t work with anyone who has a system with any number of > users. No one has said the system cannot change, but you repeatedly keep > changing stuff that potentially has huge impacts on users and it doesn’t > bother you at all. I j

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

> On Nov 15, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Christian Schulte wrote: > > Am 11/15/16 um 17:17 schrieb Jason van Zyl: >> -1 >> >> No one has likely to have read the information > > The reporter of the issue clearly has ;-) > >> and you’re reasoning is illogical. > > Making Maven behave as advertised and

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Am 11/15/16 um 17:17 schrieb Jason van Zyl: > -1 > > No one has likely to have read the information The reporter of the issue clearly has ;-) > and you’re reasoning is illogical. Making Maven behave as advertised and as requested isn't that illogical, IMHO. > Repeatedly you seem not to care if

Re: [MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

-1 No one has likely to have read the information and you’re reasoning is illogical. Repeatedly you seem not to care if you’re going to break a users build because of lack of adherence to what you think is right. What’s “right” is the way it currently works within this minor version. > On Nov

[MNG-5761] Dependency management is not transitive.

Hi, starting to write up some documentation for 3.4.0 has lead to (re-) reading various parts of the existing documentation. Regarding the issue in the subject. Would it be ok to include the corresponding fix in 3.4.0? It makes Maven 3.4.0 dependency management behave exactly as it is documented.