Le mardi 4 septembre 2012 21:59:28 Dennis Lundberg a écrit :
Hi all
I'd like to try to get the Jenkins jobs maven-plugins-ITs-m2 and
maven-plugins-ITs-m3 back on track a gain, but I'm not sure how to.
Perhaps we can crack it together. Here's a summary of the current problems:
+1000 I'm
+1
2012/9/3 Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven Install plugin 2.4
We fixed 5 issues:
https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=15112styleName=TextprojectId=11136
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-031/
If you want to have a look at the new proposed tree, I have imported
the content here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/
2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Back on this.
I wonder about changing a bit the distrib directory tree ?
The goal is to ease release.
For voting period
I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few
repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been
covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it),
other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in
history means that I never have to
For voting period the candidate files can be committed to the correct
tree here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ (instead of scp to
people.a.o)
This would be for the RCs as well?
Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to
2012/9/5 Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net:
For voting period the candidate files can be committed to the correct
tree here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ (instead of scp to
people.a.o)
This would be for the RCs as well?
Sure I will update the procedure as well.
But during vote time
Quoting Olivier Lamy (2012-09-04 22:23:11)
...
Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want
we have to create a git repo per plugin etc...
IMHO That will be a pain to manage.
No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0).
See
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Kristian Rosenvold
kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com wrote:
[del]
Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity
to re-think some of our tooling
around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not
setting up a CI) is a checkout
This would be for the RCs as well?
Sure I will update the procedure as well.
Ok, I'm not sure I see the point. The RCs will never be released and
the whole point of this storage is for released stuff, right? The only
point would be to keep things in dev/ as an archive. Not sure there's
much
2012/9/5 Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net:
This would be for the RCs as well?
Sure I will update the procedure as well.
Ok, I'm not sure I see the point. The RCs will never be released and
the whole point of this storage is for released stuff, right? The only
point would be to keep things in
2012/9/5 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com:
I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few
repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been
covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it),
Yes we must avoid such buzz/troll to save
+1 to do it step by step
The conversion is easy for projects having already a dedicated
trunk/tags/branches entry in SVN
It will be less funny for plugins but possible.
I'm also in favor to split per project/lifecycle even if it is creating a
lot of repositories
The problem to loose the plugins
+1000
and don't forget one of the simplest: maven-indexer
(my guts always tremble when I need to dcommit there, due to stupid eu/us
git-svn problems) :D
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.comwrote:
+1 to do it step by step
The conversion is easy
No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0).
I hear this argument over and over again, and it is still wrong!
The sparse checkout support is only fragmentaric at least! It's for sure not
comparable with the sparse checkout features of SVN. I'd rather call it 'farce
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you
are volunteer you must say that
+1 and volunteer for infra help.
2012/9/5 Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move and more
+1 Will volunteer
Den 5. sep. 2012 kl. 13:04 skrev Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move
+1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to
On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at
+1 and volunteer for infra help.
I'll find the opportunity to launch few more shells commands per day :-)
Arnaud
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
+1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to
On 5 September
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:04:29 +0200
Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
+1, but can not be volunteer no time at all ATM.
Next month should be better to help you guys and do some code at last...
tony.
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to
-1 Non binding.
I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent
advantages.
There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm
not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in
which it should/can be set up.
Where it is to be
+1
Il giorno 05/set/2012 13:04, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org ha scritto:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move and more
I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git
is really interesting : performances, branches management ..
But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think
that Git is like SVN
But it may be an opportunity to learn ?
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at
+1, git is far beyond being a 'fad'
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git
is really interesting : performances, branches management ..
The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we
need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a
few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all.
As for fad, I'm old enough to believe that version control systems
have their epochs.
While I'm sure it's academically interesting, I'm not sure if this
discussion is all that relevant for practical purposes. We
adapt/optimize for the technologies we use, and in moving to git I'm
quite convinced anything other than 1 release unit = 1 repo is
suboptimal. All the chit-chat about
+1 (non-binding)
But I don't have the hard-core git knowledge to help out in the move.
Would probably do more harm than good. :-)
/Anders
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold
kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com wrote:
The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Garvin LeClaire
garvin.lecla...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
+1 (non-binding)
But I don't have the hard-core git knowledge to help out in the move.
Would probably do more harm than good. :-)
/Anders
On
I think Chris ask more what will that change for our projects for
community point.
Perso I'm a bit curious to see if that will increase externals contributions.
I don't want to do that only to ease life of private maven forkers.
But so this discussion must in a separate thread not in the vote
Hi,
I'd like to release Apache Maven Scm 1.8.
We fixed 10 issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527version=18444
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-037/
Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/scm-1.8/
Vote open for 72H
[+1]
+1 binding can help
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Jesse McConnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com wrote:
+1, git is far beyond being a 'fad'
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Olivier already
+1, cannot help unfortunatelely
Milos
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on
It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all.
It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it
entails a whole new approach.
We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature
practices with our current SVN.
All I am saying is that
fwiw, i suspect most of us that have voted simply prefer working with
git over svn
certainly anyone that has had to manage branching and merging with svn
vs git would understand...it is simply better with git.
sorry you had management push you to use Hg, but git is a solid
upgrade over svn at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Scheme+for+managing+Maven+source+in+Git
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
+0
S.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move and
+1
All reasonable, and we can certainly try it with a few repos people are
interested.
On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:31 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few
repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been
covered like a zillion
Chris,
Just whom amongst us are you labeling 'a few immature devs'?
Many of us here have been using both git and svn, extensively, for
years now, and have a preference for git based on plenty of practical
experience. While git is new-ish at the ASF, it's official, and a
growing list of projects
2012/9/5 Chris Graham chrisgw...@gmail.com:
It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all.
It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it
entails a whole new approach.
We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature
I'm +0.5 on everything that currently has the trunk/tags/branches setup in SVN.
-1 on things that are not setup that way right now until more discussions and
agreement can be made on how that should be approached.
Really, I think we should just do Maven core and maybe one or two other simple
Hi Folks,
First reminder, moving site and distribution to svnpubsub is mandatory
for the end of the year (the good is dist and sync are very very fast
opposite to the current rsync process)
As you remember, Hervé started some times ago a test site
http://maventest.apache.org which is a mix of cms
We only move things we are satisfied with. But we don't vote on each
item unless there turns out to be some real issues to solve.
Most of the maven projects already have excellent git repositories at
http://git.apache.org/,
for these it's just a modified scm url and the flip of a switch or two.
2012/9/5 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com:
We only move things we are satisfied with. But we don't vote on each
item unless there turns out to be some real issues to solve.
Most of the maven projects already have excellent git repositories at
http://git.apache.org/,
Note:
+1
--
Regards,
Igor
On 12-09-05 7:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move and more generally on
Well, I consider myself a git black-belt user as well (I even wrote parts of
the german man pages).
But the problems I explained mostly happens to users which do not have that
much GIT foo.
It's just pretty easy to mess up a repo with git pull (especially when using
--rebase or
+1
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org
To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:46 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8
Hi,
I'd like to release Apache Maven Scm 1.8.
We fixed 10 issues:
+1 non binding
In terms of learning more about git, there are a LOT of free resources
available including books and other documentation as well as things like
live office hours at github and so on.
GitHub is also open sourcing all their training material so there will be
more as well.. and lots
2012/9/5 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de:
Well, I consider myself a git black-belt user as well (I even wrote parts of
the german man pages).
I know you are ;)
Let's just consider we will abandon some old plugin because we replaced it
with a much better approach. In SVN you just create a
Im not a mvn community member but use if everyday and would like to share
my thought about this thread: don't make sthg trivial hard
Git is awesome for the purpose it was created.
In this thread there are several issues not all linked to the scm
Last note: i think the plugin you speak about
No-one is using cvs anymore.
That's a wrong assumption, sad but true.
I still know companies which haven't invested in moving forward to a new
versioning system, because CVS still works good enough.
Investments is not only about the hardware and the investigation,
preparation and execution
Github user velo closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/maven-enforcer/pull/3
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
[+1] Move to git scm
[0] No interest
[-1] don't move to git (please explain why)
+1 (binding)
No capacity for volunteering to help :(
-
To unsubscribe,
+1 but have no time to volunteer at the moment.
On 9/5/12 6:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hi,
This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one
svn repository to git (multiple git repositories).
First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra
for this move
If we applied the same logic back in 2004, we would still be on CVS.
Personally, I think Git affords us a lot of opportunity to streamline
the contribution process and a much cleaner way of working (patching,
rebasing, local branches, etc.)
I've switched to Git for all of the rest of what I
+1
Hervé
Le lundi 3 septembre 2012 22:29:36 Olivier Lamy a écrit :
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven Install plugin 2.4
We fixed 5 issues:
https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=15112styleName=Te
xtprojectId=11136 Staging repository:
Let me drag out the Jazz SCM VM to see that it still works.
-Chris
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
+1
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org
To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Cc:
Sent:
I knew someone would misread that.
I was not referring to anyone on this list. People on this list are at the
pointy end of the stick, although we have a spread of abilities, most are
in the upper end of the scale. The reason for this is simple. It's because
to do it because we like it, a passion
+1 I/we can volunteer.
-Original Message-
From: Stephane Nicoll [mailto:stephane.nic...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 9:21
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+0
S.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy
+0.5 if it makes devs or patchers lives easier
No time to help, and I'd like to see a clearer understanding of how we'll
convert non-t/b/t-layout repos before we end up with 50 repositories as others
have said.
BTW, if anyone is looking at doing that, I found the svn2git worked well for
2012/9/5 Romain Manni-Bucau rmannibu...@gmail.com:
Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual
project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when you
dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is even harder
I would really like some elaboration on this,
On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:08 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
2012/9/5 Romain Manni-Bucau rmannibu...@gmail.com:
Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual
project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when you
dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is
61 matches
Mail list logo
