Hi.
Sounds like what you need is exclusion?
org.apache.commons
commons-vfs2
${commons-vfs2.version}
org.slf4j
slf4j-log4j12
log4j
log4j
org.slf4j
slf4j-jdk14
I like slf4j.
But slf4j can cause dependency hell as it really lack something
named backward compatibility.
I met that thing in one of my repo.
Really bad experience for me.
Romain Manni-Bucau 于2020年6月1日周一 上午2:35写道：
> Hmm,we are already bound to slf4j simple logger by conf and we dont want to
>
>
>> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fula_language
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlam_script
>>
>> An account of the script's development can be found at
>> https://news.microsoft.com/stories/people/adlam.html .
>>
>>
>> On 25.06.2020 01
Hi.
In your latest jdk15 versions, we found something not quite right.
a related pr is at https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/558
In short, some codes like this cannot pass tests for some Locale like
"ff_LR_#Adlm"
*@Testpublic void java15BuggyLocaleTest()
Hi.
I created a pr 8 days ago.
Is there anyone who interested in giving some suggestions?
jira [MJAVADOC-653], github
https://github.com/apache/maven-javadoc-plugin/pull/48
Hi.
I wanna know how much it improve.
could you please also run a corresponding jmh bencark for the old codes?
Olivier Lamy 于 2020年8月16日周日 下午4:36写道：
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 16:07, STEFAN REICH wrote:
>
> > Hi there!
> >
> > I am working on a very large code base, and build performance issues
...if there be a style restriction, adding it to CI is necessary.
Benjamin Marwell 于2021年10月18日周一 下午2:28写道：
> +1!
>
> Sandra and I tried similar Suggestions a while back.
> This will help new contributors a lot.
>
> Thanks for your efforts!
>
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2021, 07:10 Slawomir Jaranowski,
travis is too slow comparing to github actions.
so as github actions be free...
+1 for move to actions.
XenoAmess
From: Gary Gregory
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 12:23:46 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Using of Travis
FWIW, I plan on doing the
+1 for forcing more people quit java 5,6,7， as even 17 is out.
8 is the minimum version normal people can accept，others be zombies who do not
need to be maintained IMO. They can use original wrapper plugin anyway.
If we do not force them when beginning，it is harder to add the liminition later.
strongly suggest move maven-javadoc-plugin from *site *to *build*
It is better to let the committer handle this when they get these codes,
than letting the release manager handle this.
Olivier Lamy 于2022年2月27日周日 08:46写道：
> Thanks for the PRs.
> I'd like to start a discussion rather than some
3 days?
according to my experience, usually you need 30 - 180 days.
Tibor Digana 于2022年1月28日周五 06:40写道：
> It's nice to write some rules but still the developers are not machines.
> You can, for instance, get some vote for totally crazy things like removing
> public method in a library which is
d do everything in order to understand the PR and
> you must be convinced about the proposals almost like you were the author
> of the PR even if you are not the author.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 12:23 PM Xeno Amess wrote:
>
> > 3 days?
> > according to my experience, u
ast item to
> > confirm.
> >
> > I only want to show how the process can look.
> >
> > Currently we only have sentence that we use "Commit then Review" policy
> > without more details
> >
> > pt., 4 lut 2022 o 11:58 Xeno Amess napisał(a)
So..If I wanna make some refinements, I shall put them onto 4.0, means
master, right?
Slawomir Jaranowski 于2022年4月11日周一 03:20写道：
> our CI has running build for branches:
> - master
> - 3.9.x
> - 3.8.x
>
> It is only versions for which we can do changes, for others we simply don't
> have
you can add a config or parameter to do this.
BUT I need that log, please don't remove it
From: Kemal Soysal
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 5:39:08 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: And while I'm on the subject of logging
+1 logback
> Am 23.02.2023
+1 for -e default
From: Romain Manni-Bucau
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2023 9:15:15 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: And while I'm on the subject of logging
Hi Elliotte,
I agree -e should be the default, I don't see the point to not have the
error cause
well can we release a RC version instead？
have a feeling it would become another months long waiting...
From: Elliotte Rusty Harold
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 2:09:21 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Maven Release 3.9.1 coming soon
I vote for kill jdk8 out as to force them upgrade to 11+
From: Tamás Cservenák
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2024 10:35:55 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Java version for Maven 4?
Howdy,
See Inline.
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 3:01 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold
Hi.
I use toolchain for multi-release-jars
please don't drop it or provide another way for building multi release jars
From: Romain Manni-Bucau
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 3:48:43 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java version for Maven
You are not the only one who hates jigsaw.
As a real joke, about 4-6 years ago in a jackson mailing list, an [oracle
employee] ask for them to delete module-info in the jars to make it
runnable at lower jdk version, so yes even people in oracle (at least one)
seems don't really agree with
the latest maven version to build? We are not
slaves nor babysitters for kids after all.
If they want third party maintenance they can just pay for that, or hire
some group, I just don't think it that hard. like just what azul or
jetbrains jbm do...
Xeno Amess 于2024年2月21日周三 13:41写道：
>
I'm not meaning about tecniqually(how to exclude some files from detection)
but just, if we should do so.
Xeno Amess 于2024年1月31日周三 11:08写道：
> Is there any rules to allow some files not adding asf headers? Or actually
> we shall add ASF headers to all files?
>
Is there any rules to allow some files not adding asf headers? Or actually
we shall add ASF headers to all files?
well I just doubt.
From: Xeno Amess
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 12:18:42 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Java version for Maven 4?
well nothing affensive but do any guys got any payments from those still-java-6
companies for maintaining maven
well nothing affensive but do any guys got any payments from those still-java-6
companies for maintaining maven for them？
From: Gary Gregory
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 6:14:32 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Java version for Maven 4?
An
tpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le ven. 23 févr. 2024 à 15:10, Tamás Cservenák a
> écrit :
>
> > Make love not var!
> >
> > T
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 3:09 PM Xeno Amess wrote:
> >
> >
> The raw numbers are a more reasonable picture.
Elliotte, this is just the begin of maven 4, and maven 4.x is not just for
current projects, but for projects in the next several years.(and I guess
nobody here wanna increasing jdk major version during a same maven major
version?)
So if we agree
I hate var.
From: Tamás Cservenák
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 9:52:08 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java version for Maven
Howdy,
Some more stats based on 2nd package from Brian
whose vote would count and what be the majority:)
for example should my vote count? or not?
or just some committers? but why just committers(or not)(as some of them
might have less contributions even than non-committers)?
or just pmc?
or everyone share 1 vote(wow I don't think it shall work this
ion then move on.
Not everybody will be happy but we'll stop cycles hopefully and unhappy
people will be able to work on solutions after anyway.
Le mar. 27 févr. 2024 à 20:02, Aleksandar Kurtakov a
écrit :
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:16 PM Xeno Amess wrote:
>
> > whose vote would
+1 as a user
Frederik Boster 于2024年2月28日周三 16:15写道：
> +1
>
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024, 08:31 Benjamin Marwell wrote:
>
> > Hi Maven Devs/Users/Committers and PMC members!
> >
> > After several discussions on the mailing lists, I would like to
> > start a vote in favour of setting the minimal Java
31 matches
Mail list logo
