Re: Docker image with initialized local cache saves 50 seconds in startup

Hi Tibor, It has two issues: 1. It will not be the right plugin versions in 90% of the cases (except demo ;)) 2. It will miss all custom plugins Now question is: what happens if you mount your local repo when running docker? It works as expected. Means we could use a custom entrypoint printing

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

@Tibor: the design comes from a time functional programming was not mainstream and quite cumbersome with java, let's embrace current way of doing and move forward otherwise we can go to attic ;). Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Stephen, what issue with current toolchain you mean? On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:11 AM Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 08:02, Tibor Digana wrote: > > > Robert, I saw the code. The class has a method which returns Lambda > > function. The whole

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

We already have a version policy: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > The development line of Maven core should require a minimum JRE version that is no older than 18 months after the end of Oracle's public updates for that JRE version at the time that the

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 08:02, Tibor Digana wrote: > Robert, I saw the code. The class has a method which returns Lambda > function. The whole class was designed with OOP. The OOP is a good thing > which you should follow and follow this approach and not to return the > labda function. Basically

Re: Did you see dependabot?

On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 8:51 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > I see value in it. > But from a legal point of viewthere is no human who sends the PR, so in > theory we cannot accept such patches, can we? I'm not a lawyer, nor a scientist, but this paper sounds like a compelling read on this

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

You cannot have Java 8 sources produce Java 7 bytecode with the Java 8's javac. -target must be >= -source So to say: > So I vote -1 for J8 bytecode, and I vote +1 for J8 source code! Is not possible, you'll get something like: $ javac Test -source 1.8 -target 1.7 javac: source release 1.8

Re: Did you see dependabot?

Summary ?

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Stephen, we are in loop. Of course I know these technical things. But I am saying, and I am not alone (Michael Osipov too), that I agree with sources 1.8, but there must be1. the Vote with milestones regarding Maven and another Vote regarding plugins, and 2. written list of pros/cons regarding J8

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

The outcome is quite clear to me. There no clear 'No' to add this build/consumer feature into 3.7.0, so we'll add it which implies we must move to Java 8 due to new APIs with Java 8 class signatures. But first we need to deliver a 3.6.3 regression release. Robert On 29-10-2019 05:53:25,

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Robert, I saw the code. The class has a method which returns Lambda function. The whole class was designed with OOP. The OOP is a good thing which you should follow and follow this approach and not to return the labda function. Basically it is a precedense created in the PR saying that now J8 has

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 12:49, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 12:47, Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We already have a version policy: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy

Re: Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

I would absolutely not want to drop Java 8 before 2023 or later for the same vendor support you have mentioned. It is a good baseline for the years for now. Always consider that provide a build tool and not a cutting-edge Spring Boot application. Michael > Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. Oktober 2019

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 14:22 Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Because maintaining Java 7 is a barrier to new contributors. It is tricky > enough to get Java 8 set up for some developers. Every version we support > adds complexity for contributors.

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Why not have 3.7.0 plugin updates and other non-technical stuff, have it parallely maintained for some time and move with Maven 3.8.0 to Java 8 next year?! Does that sound like a plan? I'd be happy with that. I'd also expect an announcement on dev@, announce@ and users@. Michael > Gesendet:

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 14:24, Enrico Olivelli a écrit : > Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 14:22 Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > Because maintaining Java 7 is a barrier to new contributors. It is tricky > > enough to get Java 8 set up for some

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 12:47, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > We already have a version policy: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > (while that page says draft, the proposal was on-list in 2014 and just converted into a wiki

Re: Did you see dependabot?

I have received dependabot right now and merged. https://github.com/Tibor17/surefire-tcp-connector/pull/1 Of course, my code is written just for fun and no legal issues are my problem. On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 7:49 PM Paul Hammant wrote: > Here's an interesting co-incidence. A chg I donated to

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Because maintaining Java 7 is a barrier to new contributors. It is tricky enough to get Java 8 set up for some developers. Every version we support adds complexity for contributors. Personally, I think we should be thinking about dropping even Java 8 if we wait until next year and just follow the

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

One of the fundamental features of Maven is Convention Over Configuration, in other words: define defaults where possible, but make it possible to change these values. However, "default" can be explained differently, either as constant (forever) or as a predefined value within a certain

Re: Did you see dependabot?

Here's an interesting co-incidence. A chg I donated to Google's Cloud bits and pieces - https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/google-cloud-datastore/pull/205/files *required and received* a CLA. @elharo just marked it as not needed, which is quite correct as this lib has been succeeded by

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Sdkman is also a good option (and avoids binaries in sources) That said, cant plugin check out they work? It does not sound hard to check java version/parameters/... and validate that when creating a mojo, isnt it? Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 19:46, Robert Scholte a écrit : > One of the

RE: Maven EAR Plugin 3.0.2

Hi Karl, > I will take a look within the next two weeks so I can create a new release ... That would be great. Thank you. Regards, Marat Abrarov. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional

Re: Did you see dependabot?

I think you agree that the thesis has no bearing on the actions that Dependabot recommends. Worked Dependabot example https://github.com/jbehave/jbehave-tutorial/pull/19/files (I consumed this one for the JBehave team). ^ That was not copyrightable. It is not *original expression*, if it was and

Re: Did you see dependabot?

The conclusion of the paper itself is 3 pages (no paragraphs, so it might be written by an AI ;-). - Dutch (and international) copyright law don't require a copyright holder to be human - so the work itself needs to be evaluated, two criteria that factor into this; requirement of reflecting an

Maven EAR Plugin 3.0.2

Hi community, Does anybody know plans on release of Maven EAR Plugin (3.0.2+, i.e. next version)? If there is an open resource where release plan / schedule can be found then I appreciate if smbd could point it. Thank you. Regards, Marat Abrarov.

Re: Maven EAR Plugin 3.0.2

Hi, On 29.10.19 17:10, abra...@gmail.com wrote: Hi community, Does anybody know plans on release of Maven EAR Plugin (3.0.2+, i.e. next version)? If there is an open resource where release plan / schedule can be found then I appreciate if smbd could point it. First to say. This is an open

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 or more ... haha Manfred Stephen Connolly wrote on 2019-10-29 16:23 (GMT -07:00): > +1 > > On Tue 29 Oct 2019 at 20:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > >> Hi to all, >> >> based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of >> Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 Enrico Il mar 29 ott 2019, 21:18 Romain Manni-Bucau ha scritto: > +1 (non binding) > > Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 21:12, Karl Heinz Marbaise a > écrit : > > > Hi, > > > > +1 from me. > > > > Kind regards > > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > > > On 29.10.19 21:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > > > Hi to

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

non-binding +1 Gary On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 4:11 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Kind

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Hi, +1 from me. Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise On 29.10.19 21:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: Hi to all, based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. Vote open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 Kind

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 (non-binding) regards, François fpa...@apache.org Le 29/10/2019 à 21:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit : > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [

Next Generation Integration Testing for Plugins/Core

Hi to all, I've invested some time to get a thing working in a different way which nags me for a long time. Integration tests for maven plugins and for maven core... So created a prototype based on a JUnit Jupiter extension. The following is the JUnit Jupiter extension (currently very hacky

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 at 6:11 am, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Kind regards > Karl

[VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Hi to all, based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. Vote open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise - To

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 (non binding) Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 21:12, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit : > Hi, > > +1 from me. > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > On 29.10.19 21:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > > Hi to all, > > > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > > Maven Core

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Am 2019-10-29 um 21:11 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise: Hi to all, based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. Vote open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 We have a bus load of issues for 3.7.0 in JIRA. I'd

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 from m2e and Tycho POV. Both have already require Java 8 for several versions anyways, so the target audience is definitely already away from Java 7.

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Karl, I am not happy with this short text because you did not say that we will turn the code to J8. There is a plugin automating this transformation. One man can do it in his private and that's it. Of course somebody has to execute performance tests. Without changing the code we would not be

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 On Tue 29 Oct 2019 at 20:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz

Docker image with initialized local cache saves 50 seconds in startup

If you use Docker images with Maven with no mapping of cache to the volumes, you may notice that Maven downloads the plugins for the build lifecycle. This slows down the build because a lot of artifacts and plugins are initially downloaded. This takes 50 seconds which might be even longer than

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Hi Tibor, can we the keep discussion out of this thread cause it's a VOTE thread... On 29.10.19 22:24, Tibor Digana wrote: Karl, I am not happy with this short text because you did not say that we will turn the code to J8. There is a plugin automating this transformation. One man can do it in

Re: Next Generation Integration Testing for Plugins/Core

Hi Karl Not sure id do a MavenIT annotation - test is enough probably - but i like jupiter style. Im less exited by assertj but it is probably a habit thing. Wonder if you evaluated to run in a fake filesystem like jimfs or so and enable the pom+files to be defined on the test method? Goal

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 On Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 21:11 Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz

[VOTE] Release Apache Maven Assembly Plugin version 3.2.0

Hi, We solved 9 issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317220=12344773=Text Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1534/

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1 Regards, Hervé Le mardi 29 octobre 2019, 21:11:33 CET Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit : > Hi to all, > > based on the discusion this is the formal VOTE to lift the minimum of > Maven Core with version 3.7.0 to JDK 8 minimum. > > Vote open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 >

[VOTE] Release Apache Maven Source Plugin version 3.2.0

Hi, We solved 2 issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317924&=12345522=Text Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1532/

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 22:24, Tibor Digana a écrit : > Karl, I am not happy with this short text because you did not say that we > will turn the code to J8. > There is a plugin automating this transformation. > One man can do it in his private and that's it. > Of course somebody has to execute

Re: Next Generation Integration Testing for Plugins/Core

Hi Romain, On 29.10.19 22:40, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: Hi Karl Not sure id do a MavenIT annotation - test is enough probably - but i like jupiter style. MavenIT[1] annotation contains more information like global/local cache, the default goals which are used for the build, debugging or not

[VOTE] Release Apache Maven JAR Plugin version Y.Z

Hi, We solved 1 issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317526=12345503=Text Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1533/

Re: Next Generation Integration Testing for Plugins/Core

Le mar. 29 oct. 2019 à 22:58, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit : > Hi Romain, > > On 29.10.19 22:40, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > Hi Karl > > > > Not sure id do a MavenIT annotation - test is enough probably - but i > > like jupiter style. > > MavenIT[1] annotation contains more information like

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven JAR Plugin version Y.Z

Hi Hervé, I think you meant: "[VOTE] Release Apache Maven Source Plugin Version 3.2.0" didn't you ? Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise On 29.10.19 22:55, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: Hi, We solved 1 issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317526=12345503=Text

Re: [VOTE] JDK 8 Minimum Requirement for Maven 3.7.0

+1  Jesper Udby ⁣Hent BlueMail til Android ​ Den 30. okt. 2019 02.34, fra 02.34, Manfred Moser skrev: >+1 > >or more ... haha > >Manfred > >Stephen Connolly wrote on 2019-10-29 16:23 (GMT -07:00): > >> +1 >> >> On Tue 29 Oct 2019 at 20:11, Karl Heinz Marbaise >wrote: >> >>> Hi to all, >>>