2009/12/18 Paul Benedict :
> Sweet! Thanks, Lukasz. I voted for it. I hope everyone else here votes
> for it too.
Sure, I added my vote also!
Regards
--
Lukasz
http://www.lenart.org.pl/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr..
Sweet! Thanks, Lukasz. I voted for it. I hope everyone else here votes
for it too.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Lukasz Lenart
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is the solution for our problem ->
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-159
> though either we need to wait for Maven team or to build our
Hi,
Here is the solution for our problem ->
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-159
though either we need to wait for Maven team or to build our own
release manager ;-)
Regards
--
Lukasz
http://www.lenart.org.pl/
-
To uns
Martin,
Just to be clear, I am not saying that the Maven's way is the right
way. There are two way to do releases: manually or batch. In manual
mode, the user is prompted to name the tag. In batch mode, Maven
creates the tag by its own naming standards (projectname-version).
Paul
On Thu, Dec 17,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I am saying that if we keep the uppercase and underscore convention,
> we can't accept the default of Maven's tag names. The release manager
> just has to continue using the format we do today. That's all.
I was trying to understand the disa
I am saying that if we keep the uppercase and underscore convention,
we can't accept the default of Maven's tag names. The release manager
just has to continue using the format we do today. That's all.
Paul
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:34 PM,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I have nothing against continuing the way *we* do it, but Maven
> doesn't do it this way. Taking the defaults provided by the Maven
> Release Plugin will create tag names like "struts-1.3.11" over
> "STRUTS_1_3_11".
>
> Either way we decide,
I have nothing against continuing the way *we* do it, but Maven
doesn't do it this way. Taking the defaults provided by the Maven
Release Plugin will create tag names like "struts-1.3.11" over
"STRUTS_1_3_11".
Either way we decide, it is not a major loss for the other side, but
not able to accept
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Wes Wannemacher wrote:
> Not to split hairs, Lukasz, but this is the "released" pom -
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/maven/tags/struts2-archetype-starter-2.1.8.1/pom.xml
>
> Which looks fine.
>
> When I was checking this, it reminded me of something I
I am +1 for using the default that maven suggest. Less to remember and document.
musachy
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Lukasz Lenart
wrote:
> 2009/12/17 Wes Wannemacher :
>> If no one responds, I will probably update the docs so that we take
>> the default. But, if an artifact is already rele
2009/12/17 Wes Wannemacher :
> If no one responds, I will probably update the docs so that we take
> the default. But, if an artifact is already released, we should
> probably leave it as-is, since the released pom
> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/maven/tags/struts2-archetype-starter-2.1.
Lukasz, don't worry about it... One of the nice (depending on your
perspective) things about SVN over CVS is that tags are much easier to
correct... We could `svn move` that directory to the proper name, but
I wanted to know if there is any good reason to use that other
convention. I'd rather see u
2009/12/17 Wes Wannemacher :
> When I was checking this, it reminded me of something I have been
> meaning to ask. If you look at the tag name that Lukasz used -
> "struts2-archetype-starter-2.1.8.1" But, somewhere in our docs, we use
> a tag name like this - "STRUTS2_ARCHETYPE_STARTER_2_1_8_1" whi
Not to split hairs, Lukasz, but this is the "released" pom -
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/maven/tags/struts2-archetype-starter-2.1.8.1/pom.xml
Which looks fine.
When I was checking this, it reminded me of something I have been
meaning to ask. If you look at the tag name that Lukasz us
2009/12/16 Martin Cooper :
> In Lukasz's checkins just now, I see version numbers being changed to
> 2.1.8-SNAPSHOT. Maybe I'm misinterpreting what's going on, but that
> seems like going backwards. We already have a 2.1.8 and a 2.1.8.1, so
> it seems to me that any snapshot version we should be us
15 matches
Mail list logo
