Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

Am 02/25/17 um 22:55 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise: > Hi, > > based on the started discussion about either to bring 3.5.0-alpha-1 to > Central or not I would suggest to discuss in a separate thread and > prevent using the VOTE's threads for that (as Stephen already mentioned). > > Using Central:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 02/25/17 um 17:25 schrieb Tibor Digana: >>> There are two commits for MNG-6078 part of -alpha-1. > > This was caused by system property duplicates in surefire ITs. > It is already fixed in a branch SUREFIRE_SYSPROP_DUPLICATES. If something works with 3.3.9 but not 3.5.0, we need to fix it in

Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

Imho it should go to Central just like any other release. All components and everything. The version clearly tells thats its alpha and this allows for clean testing, embedding and so on. We have done it in the past and I dont see any reason for changing this. Manfred Stephen Connolly wrote

Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

So if I am embedding Maven, how do I embed Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1? (I know it should not be a big issue as we should have the release soon anyway, but more from the principal POV) Consider the Jenkins "evil" job type plugin that has dependencies on some of the artifacts that are in the staging

Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

It depends on what the task of Central is. If it for *dependencies*, there's no need to publish pre-final versions; don't think we should motive plugins to depend on alphas. AFAIK the common way to get a new version of Maven is via http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi and not via Central.

Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

I don't see a reason not to push 3.5.0-alpha-1 to Central. It has been done this way for previous versions, and makes it more broadly applicable for all users. Guillaume Le 25/02/2017 à 22:55, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit : Hi, based on the started discussion about either to bring

Re: [DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

My view is we should release to central. I am not so strongly held of this view that I would object to alternatives... but I do think just dropping the staging repo and pushing the src to dist would be a bad plan On Sat 25 Feb 2017 at 21:56, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi,

[DISCUSS] 3.5.0 alpha/beta's on Central

Hi, based on the started discussion about either to bring 3.5.0-alpha-1 to Central or not I would suggest to discuss in a separate thread and prevent using the VOTE's threads for that (as Stephen already mentioned). Using Central: o Everybody can use it and make tests on it. Using an other

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

I think it might be better if we could release them into a different repo so that the artifacts are available - just not synced to central. Either that or we say screw it sync to central... al least if we make them available via dist. If we don't make available via dist, then yes we should just

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

I would say: all pre-final should be dropped, i.e. should not up in Central. However, we could make the distributions available for download. If this is done via the staged repository or via our dist folder[1], I don't mind; whatever fits best. Robert [1]

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi, the last two days I'm running the 3.5.0-alpha-1 here on my mac with system installation and doing my work under usual user...not any problem so far... I have taken a look into the lib/ext folder where I can't find a file similar to that which could only be there if the process has

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

We need to start thinking whether any of the issues so far are enough to drop alpha-1 and run with alpha-2 IMHO we would gain more information from users if we release alpha-1 with and ACK for the known issues and say that alpha-2 is 1-2 weeks away rather than drop alpha-1 and wait that time for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Is it still non-critical if the user lacks write access to that directory? On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Robert Scholte wrote: > Hi, > > found a non-critical issue. It seems like with every Maven build, a new > lib/ext/jansi-64-1-xxx.13 is generated. > If

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 2017-02-25 um 17:07 schrieb Robert Scholte: Hi, found a non-critical issue. It seems like with every Maven build, a new lib/ext/jansi-64-1-xxx.13 is generated. If this is a temp-file, I'd rather write it to the OS temp folder instead of the Maven distribution. This is horribly

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

The SNAPSHOT is therefore getting quite big 70 MB. On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Robert Scholte wrote: > Hi, > > found a non-critical issue. It seems like with every Maven build, a new > lib/ext/jansi-64-1-xxx.13 is generated. > If this is a temp-file, I'd

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

>>There are two commits for MNG-6078 part of -alpha-1. This was caused by system property duplicates in surefire ITs. It is already fixed in a branch SUREFIRE_SYSPROP_DUPLICATES. System props duplicates: -DreuseForks=false -DreuseForks=true I am sure the ITs now pass because of Stepen's commit

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

@Michael-O The issue(two errors in ForkModeIT) with commit e0bcffd05bb04001f97bf752de56bca7137da3e2 is caused by duplicate properties but it is not cause of that commit. I have found the root cause (reuseForks duplicates): -DforkMode=perthread *-DreuseForks=false -DreuseForks=true*

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi, found a non-critical issue. It seems like with every Maven build, a new lib/ext/jansi-64-1-xxx.13 is generated. If this is a temp-file, I'd rather write it to the OS temp folder instead of the Maven distribution. Robert On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:10:18 +0100, Stephen Connolly

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 02/25/17 um 14:40 schrieb Tibor Digana: > @Stephen > @Michael-O > What changed in Maven after Michael used his snapshot version of > Maven-3.5.0-SNAPSHOT? > Michael said that surefire failed with ForkModeIT and he tested Surefire's > commits from HEAD to

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

@Stephen @Michael-O What changed in Maven after Michael used his snapshot version of Maven-3.5.0-SNAPSHOT? Michael said that surefire failed with ForkModeIT and he tested Surefire's commits from HEAD to 502d18442113b4c6c72630dca5842e1eb287b8b0. I followed more deeply in the commits of Surefire

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

We should also tip our hat to what happened to 3.4.x On Sat 25 Feb 2017 at 11:41, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we can do alpha release notes. It maybe on a sub page > > Thanks for picking this up (I was going to start it later today subject to > family

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

I think we can do alpha release notes. It maybe on a sub page Thanks for picking this up (I was going to start it later today subject to family approval ;-) ) On Sat 25 Feb 2017 at 11:34, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi, > > I have started to summarize the changes we had in

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi, I have started to summarize the changes we had in 3.5.0-alpha-1.. https://github.com/khmarbaise/maven-release-notes/blob/master/content/markdown/docs/3.5.0/release-notes.md If there are any supplementals/changes/fixes etc. Please make an issue or a pull request to it...or write here...