Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

> > The idea is to not default to group:artifact but to check if the artifact > starts with a suffix of the group-ID and then skip this. So g=org.hibernate > a=hibernate-core would become org.hibernate.core and not > org.hibernate.hibernate.core. This is a neat trick I wished in the past in > some

Recent issues found in Surefire master/Maven Clean Plugin 3.0.0 with Maven master

Hi folks, Christian Schulte asked me a couple of days ago wether I am able to build Surefire master with Maven master. It was constantly failing for him on his OpenBSD machines. Since I have several real servers with FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE at hand I did run all Surefire ITs and I was able to

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

Hi, I have identified a bug[1] in Maven Core based on an issue related to versions-maven-plugin: I have made already a fix for it and all tests are running[2]. Any objection to merge that issue into master ? Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise [1]:

How are artifacts resolved from the reactor via LegacyRepositorySystem?

Hello. I'm currently trying to debug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MASSEMBLY-848 and am reaching this line: https://github.com/apache/maven-plugins/blob/trunk/maven-assembly-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugins/assembly/artifact/DefaultDependencyResolver.java#L232 I'm debugging

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

Am 2017-02-17 um 18:03 schrieb Arnaud Héritier: Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have a bug in 3.5 and not in 3.3.9 but for now no time to dig The project : https://github.com/jenkinsci/maven-plugin Downloading:

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

Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a death march with no end in site... so I am seeking ways to identify an end where we can cut 3.5.0 and start on 3.5.1 I don't want to be here in 2-3 weeks and still

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user Tibor17 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 @sbrannen It looks like we will rename 2.19.2 to 2.20.0, but this is not official yet. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on

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

+1 for to have the cat out of the box !!! Le ven. 17 févr. 2017 à 19:19, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a > death march with no

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

Am 02/17/17 um 19:18 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a > death march with no end in site... so I am seeking ways to identify an end > where we can cut 3.5.0 and start

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

there is some level of misunderstanding my proposal is not to force any default value: just check (for people publishing to Central) that chosen value starts with groupId then, in some Maven plugin, we can independently propose magic help to propose auto-calculated default values to people

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

one question I have on this is: how do we want to track issues in Jira? Do we let 3.5.0 open (with its 65 issues) or do we release it renamed as 3.5.0-alpha-1? Do we create a 3.5.0-alpha-1 version just to mark bugs found in 3.5.0-alpha-1 as "affects version"? Regards, Hervé Le samedi 18

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

if we go with the "alpha-1" road, let's use the benefit: it may have some little issues then +1 to cut alpha-1 now Regards, Hervé Le vendredi 17 février 2017, 18:57:18 CET Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > +1 for to have the cat out of the box !!! > > Le ven. 17 févr. 2017 à 19:19, Stephen

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

-1: fix pending bugs, otherwise users will report more bugs For instance Robert said the above fix was a workaround. On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

Hervé: I feel like I don't completely understand the proposal, but I feel like we can achieve your intent using the Module-Name simply by defaulting it to g:a and building up a good base of new stuff going into Central such that when people start using jigsaw, there is a good pattern in place and

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

Hi Karl Heinz, looking at the commit[1] I see that the projectBuildList.contains will prevent the NPE, but it looks weird to me that the projectBuildList does not contain a mavenProject which was marked as finished so can be built. Why is it null? If there's no clear reason yet, there

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

Hi all, At which line is NPE? [1] looks like multithreading. Is NPE cause due to Java Memory Model? One thread is writer, seconds is reader, and object is not thread-safe (immutable, synchronized either volatile). [1]

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

Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have a bug in 3.5 and not in 3.3.9 but for now no time to dig The project : https://github.com/jenkinsci/maven-plugin Here are the logs with 3.3.9 Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5;

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

Thats how I understand it as well and I like it. Brian Fox wrote on 2017-02-17 06:01: > Hervé: I feel like I don't completely understand the proposal, but I feel > like we can achieve your intent using the Module-Name simply by defaulting > it to g:a and building up a good base of new stuff

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

It happens with ArrayList filled up with objects in writer Thread. Reader will see: size=5, and Object array has all elements null. In such cases I use ConcurrentLinkedQueue, thread-safe impl without using locks - just write once and reads multiple times - or use Guava. Does this happen with this?

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

I would expect this to be a wagon issue. Could you try to replace only these jars? i.e. wagon-*-2.12 back to wagon-*-2.10 as in 3.3.9 Robert On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:03:04 +0100, Arnaud Héritier wrote: Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user sbrannen commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 @marcphilipp, 2.19.2 will support "*Tests" by default as well: https://twitter.com/sam_brannen/status/766979129954570240 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user sbrannen commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 Very happy to hear that the Surefire team has taken over the provider for the JUnit Platform!!! Thanks! 😄 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email

[GitHub] maven-surefire pull request #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donate...

Github user sbrannen commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142#discussion_r101716366 --- Diff: surefire-providers/pom.xml --- @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ surefire-junit3 surefire-junit4 surefire-junit47 +