is there any othwer way to put site.xml other thn putting it inside src/site
folder
Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi,
2007/9/7, Lukas Theussl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
I just noticed that the site descriptors for the doxia (and maven) site
contain a head element, apparently to include a
2008/11/23 Stephen Connolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/11/22 Stephen Connolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The problem is that repo1.maven.org is used by everyone, and even some
things that are not Maven (e.g. ivy, etc)
A big +1. Changing the published poms format is very impacting. Not
only for the
2008/11/23 Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what I'm saying is let's go farther and make the pom deployed to the
repo a more minimal pom... keeping only that which is actually needed
This can only be done for poms that are not packaging poms, that is
for things that are not inherited.
Hi,
ping (one binding vote missing).
Thanks !
--
Olivier
2008/11/18 Olivier Lamy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
I'd like to release maven-changes-plugin version 2.1.
We solved 27 issues :
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14064styleName=HtmlprojectId=11212Create=Create
+1
Emmanuel
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:57 PM, Olivier Lamy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to release maven-changes-plugin version 2.1.
We solved 27 issues :
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14064styleName=HtmlprojectId=11212Create=Create
Staging repo:
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
3 +1 (binding) ; snicoll, evenisse, olamy.
1 +1 (non-binding) : bellingard.
I will move artifacts to the central repo.
Thanks,
--
Olivier
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
No, our plugins have to be compatible with java 1.4 (which is the current
java version supported by maven 2.0.X).
Be careful to not use 1.5 APIs and syntax in your patch.
Arnaud
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 8:17 PM, Andreas Höhmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello folks,
can we add a
plugin
Hi just noticed we have now 3 CI servers :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum : Continuum @ Apache
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/Maven/ : Hudson @ Apache
https://grid.sonatype.org/ : Hudson @ Sonatype
Isn't it a little bit to much ??
Do you follow notifications ?
Are they
--
DCO GmbH
Stockholmer Alle 30c
44269 Dortmund
Fon: +(49) 231 477766-60
Fax: +(49) 231 477766-80
Geschäftsführer: Uwe Falkenberg, Walter Dilba
Eingetragen Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 21208
USt.-ID: DE 256 202 508
---BeginMessage---
Hello,
we evaluating MyEclipse (v6.5) as our new development
Please open an issue here
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MECLIPSE
Without it we'll certainly forgot your patch.
It will help if you deliver also an integration test with a maven project
and what you expect in eclipse config files.
Arnaud
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Marcus Padberg [EMAIL
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original features. Merging
them will avoid two equivalent plugins and provide a better tested, more
+1
Arnaud
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 4:31 PM, nicolas de loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original
On 24-Nov-08, at 3:10 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Hi just noticed we have now 3 CI servers :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum : Continuum @ Apache
I don't look at this.
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/Maven/ : Hudson @ Apache
This one can definitely be taken down. I'll
+1
On 24-Nov-08, at 7:31 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently
released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original features.
Merging
them will
On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original features. Merging
them will avoid two
Is there someone with required rigths who can stop notifications from unused
servers ?
Arnaud
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24-Nov-08, at 3:10 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Hi just noticed we have now 3 CI servers :
On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 16:31 +0100, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original features. Merging
them will
Hi
Is it normal to have 3 lifecycles for the release plugin ?
- The release plugin itself : 2.0-beta-9-SNAPSHOT in the trunk
- The release library : 1.0-alpha-6-SNAPSHOT in the trunk
- The release pom parent : 6-SNAPSHOT in the trunk
But we have only one Jira :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: aheritier
Date: Mon Nov 24 09:02:03 2008
New Revision: 720229
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=720229view=rev
Log:
MRELEASE-390 : Add VSS dependency
+ Remove unused git-commons dependency
Isn't maven-scm-provider-git-commons required by
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Gilles Scokart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A big +1. Changing the published poms format is very impacting. Not
only for the maven client, but for all tools that are using the
repository as a server (ivy, buildr, maven proxies repository
managers, etc...).
Hi,
We could replace all dependencies by the pom
org.apache.maven.scm:maven-scm-providers-standard which include all
scm providers.
--
Olivier
2008/11/24 Dennis Lundberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: aheritier
Date: Mon Nov 24 09:02:03 2008
New Revision: 720229
URL:
+1 certainly
--
jesse mcconnell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Jamie Whitehouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 16:31 +0100, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join
I just checked out and build doxia from the source, and I get the following
stack trace from the goal doxia:render-books. I do not get
then error with 1.0-alpha-11.
o The book is composed on 2 chapters with section of apt document
o apt documents contain only text bocks, not figures or links.
There are still issues with the scp wagon beta-3 that represent a
regression over 2.0.9. I'm thinking we should roll 2.0.x back to beta-2
now that there is 2.1.x for people to use. Does anyone have a strong
opinion on this? If we pull it back then 2.0.10 is ready to go.
FWIW, I meant roll back to beta3 from beta4
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:31 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: roll back 2.0.10 wagon to beta-2
There are still issues with the scp wagon beta-3 that represent a
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there someone with required rigths who can stop notifications from unused
servers ?
And can it be setup to email the committer causing failures?
I'm not on the notification list because most of (read almost all) the
Not easily because the grid is working with several different svn's
where the userid's don't line up to a single domain for email. It only
works if the svn user=email which can be true for only one domain at a
time.
-Original Message-
From: Barrie Treloar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
I think you'll have to roll back to beta-2 from beta-4. Beta-4 came out
specifically to address major problems found in beta-3.
Brian E. Fox wrote:
FWIW, I meant roll back to beta3 from beta4
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 24,
It's not a runtime dependency for gitexe thus we should take it as a
transitive dep :
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/scm/trunk/maven-scm-providers/maven-scm-providers-git/maven-scm-provider-gitexe/pom.xml
I have to admit I don't realy understand why the code was split in several
modules for
ok cool.
I'll fix it.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:10 PM, Olivier Lamy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We could replace all dependencies by the pom
org.apache.maven.scm:maven-scm-providers-standard which include all
scm providers.
--
Olivier
2008/11/24 Dennis Lundberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Why didn't we store the maven-release-manager under shared and the plugin
under plugins ? Just to share the version used of SCM ?
Arnaud
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Arnaud HERITIER [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Hi
Is it normal to have 3 lifecycles for the release plugin ?
- The release
Ok yeah that's what I thought. I mean put it back to whatever 2.0.9 was
running
-Original Message-
From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:44 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: roll back 2.0.10 wagon to beta-3
I think you'll have to roll back
I agree with Arnaud. If they had a shared release cycle it would make sense to
group together the release manager with the plugin. But since all three parts
are released separately, I think it would be better to move the plugin part to
plugins and the manager to shared.
Arnaud HERITIER
Hi guys,
What do you think about this :
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-391
Do you think I forgot something ?
Does it make sense for you ?
--
..
Arnaud HERITIER
12 guidelines to boost your productivity with a Java software
what's with the cross posting to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 25/11/2008, at 2:31 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently
released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also
+1
On 25/11/2008, at 2:31 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Hi,
Charlie Collins, who created and maintain the gwt-maven project on
googlecode, would like to join Mojo to merge with the recently
released Mojo
one. Both plugins share some goals but also have original features.
Merging
them will
+1
On 25/11/2008, at 6:30 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
There are still issues with the scp wagon beta-3 that represent a
regression over 2.0.9. I'm thinking we should roll 2.0.x back to
beta-2
now that there is 2.1.x for people to use. Does anyone have a strong
opinion on this? If we pull it
I'm not quite sure why the versions are different, I'd go more towards
having one release cycle.
- Brett
On 25/11/2008, at 9:06 AM, Paul Gier wrote:
I agree with Arnaud. If they had a shared release cycle it would
make sense to group together the release manager with the plugin.
But
On 24-Nov-08, at 1:04 PM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Why didn't we store the maven-release-manager under shared and the
plugin
under plugins ? Just to share the version used of SCM ?
Because they always got released together because they are so coupled.
When you fix something in the plugin
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not easily because the grid is working with several different svn's
where the userid's don't line up to a single domain for email. It only
works if the svn user=email which can be true for only one domain at a
time.
That
Continuum already does this by retrieving the email address from the
POM for the given SVN id in the developers section.
On 25/11/2008, at 12:31 PM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Not easily because the grid is working with
On 25/11/2008, at 3:12 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Is there someone with required rigths who can stop notifications
from unused
servers ?
I can send the notifications for the Continuum ones elsewhere if
nobody is listening to them (feel free to object if you do). Just bear
in mind
Hello,
I am using JUnitDoclet, when it is executed on my .java files it only
produces a skeleton of the test class. It automates all methods that are
in that test class but the test statements were not generated.
Does JUnitDoclet only produce the skeleton of a .java file, or does it
produce a
It sounds like that would supercede the need for the stage plugin. If
you can get that to work more efficiently than what it does now that'd
be a good thing.
Even though most repository managers will support this functionality
in fairly near future, I imagine we'll need a basic capability
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Continuum already does this by retrieving the email address from the POM for
the given SVN id in the developers section.
That would assume I've updated that section to include myself :)
I'm sure others forget too...
I'm not sure even rolling in changes to support this in 2.0.11+
answers the question. We're still having trouble getting people up
from 2.0.6 type versions, and we're still supporting Maven 1 clients.
A forced upgrade, even over time, seems impractical at this point.
A lot of good
Does this mean maven 2.0.10+ will require a new plugin attached to
(pre)deploy phase to generate a 4.0.0 compatible POM ?
2008/11/25 Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not sure even rolling in changes to support this in 2.0.11+ answers the
question. We're still having trouble getting people up
No. I wouldn't see any model or deployment changes occurring in 2.0.x.
However, since the deploy plugin delegates to Maven's artifact
mechanism in 2.1.0, it can do the extra adjustments itself if there
were a new model version introduced.
- Brett
On 25/11/2008, at 6:51 PM, nicolas de loof
48 matches
Mail list logo
