Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-16 Thread Daniel Kulp
t; From: Max Bowsher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:30 PM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: moving forward with 2.0.8 > > Brian E. Fox wrote: > > I think classes should be first. (before test-classes) > > Wasn't that

RE: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-16 Thread Jörg Schaible
her > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:30 PM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: moving forward with 2.0.8 > > Brian E. Fox wrote: >> I think classes should be first. (before test-classes) > > Wasn't that the old way, and it's recently been switched

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-16 Thread Benjamin Bentmann
n an hour to close them (one way or the other) for Maven 2.0.8 as they have attached patches: - no-goal-help.patch at MNG-2166 (MNG-3276) - guide-site.patch at MNG-3244 Benjamin Bentmann -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/moving-forward-with-2.0.8-tf4796513s177.html#a13790374

RE: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Brian E. Fox
Yeah that makes sense. Which way is it now? -Original Message- From: Max Bowsher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:30 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: moving forward with 2.0.8 Brian E. Fox wrote: > I think classes should be first. (before t

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Benjamin Bentmann
s should be first, as requested by MNG-3118 and its relatives/duplicates. Benjamin Bentmann -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/moving-forward-with-2.0.8-tf4796513s177.html#a13783818 Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Daniel Kulp
etely OK with the change. I've fixed my testcase so it works properly either way now. Dan > > -Original Message- > From: Hervé BOUTEMY [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 7:49 AM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: moving forward with

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Max Bowsher
Brian E. Fox wrote: > I think classes should be first. (before test-classes) Wasn't that the old way, and it's recently been switched? Presumably the rationale is to allow test-classes to contain resources which override same-named resources in the main classes dir, or something? Max. signat

RE: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Brian E. Fox
Maven Developers List Subject: Re: moving forward with 2.0.8 Perhaps I know the code that changed the order: while fixing "[MANTTASKS-22] ensure proper order of artifacts in ArtifactResolutionResult", the fix in trunk (r591996) was to transform a HashSet to a L

RE: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Brian E. Fox
I think classes should be first. (before test-classes) -Original Message- From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:14 PM To: dev@maven.apache.org Cc: Brian E. Fox Subject: Re: moving forward with 2.0.8 On Thursday 15 November 2007, Brian E. Fox

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-15 Thread Mauro Talevi
Brian E. Fox wrote: All, It's time to move forward with 2.0.8. I stopped to evaluate MNG-3259 but I think this is an edge case and the fix has a greater chance of breaking more stuff. I'd rather fix this early in 2.0.9 so there is plenty of time for any issues to surface. I've placed a new build

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-14 Thread Hervé BOUTEMY
Perhaps I know the code that changed the order: while fixing "[MANTTASKS-22] ensure proper order of artifacts in ArtifactResolutionResult", the fix in trunk (r591996) was to transform a HashSet to a LinkedHashSet in o.a.m.artifact.resolver.ArtifactResolutionResult. But when porting the fix back

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-14 Thread Raphaël Piéroni
worked for my build Raphaël 2007/11/13, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > All, > > It's time to move forward with 2.0.8. I stopped to evaluate MNG-3259 but > I think this is an edge case and the fix has a greater chance of > breaking more stuff. I'd rather fix this early in 2.0.9 so there is >

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-14 Thread Daniel Kulp
Brian, 2.0.8 seems to have re-ordered the classpath or something such that if I have a unit test that does: System.out.println(getClass().getResource(".").toString()); it prints out the directory in the target/classes dir instead of the target/test-classes.With 2.0.5 - 2.0.7, it returned th

Re: moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-14 Thread Daniel Kulp
Brian, CXF doesn't build with 2.0.8-SNAPSHOT. It builds fine with 2.0.7, but I'm getting test failures with 2.0.8-SNAPSHOT. I'll try and dig into it in a bit. Also, the README.txt needs updating before you release it. Dan > 2007/11/13, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > All, > > > >

moving forward with 2.0.8

2007-11-13 Thread Brian E. Fox
All, It's time to move forward with 2.0.8. I stopped to evaluate MNG-3259 but I think this is an edge case and the fix has a greater chance of breaking more stuff. I'd rather fix this early in 2.0.9 so there is plenty of time for any issues to surface. I've placed a new build on http://people.apac