Hello everybody,
I understand the need to distinguish between these attempts. I now
have a local copy of 3.0.4 on my disc (as well as on some others).
Next month forgetful as I am, I will not know anymore which of the
different 3.0.4 copies was the blessed one. Let alone that the tag in
Personally, I'd rather burn 3.0.4 and have 3.0.5, 3.0.6, etc
version numbers are cheap...
if anyone asks what happend to 3.0.4, we just say, oh that was not
released, there's a tag of it in svn, but there are no binaries or source
distributions because it failed for some reason.
On 5 December
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
Personally, I'd rather burn 3.0.4 and have 3.0.5, 3.0.6, etc
version numbers are cheap...
if anyone asks what happend to 3.0.4, we just say, oh that was not
released, there's a tag of it in svn, but there
This approach fails to make the release candidate available to a wider
community. We need to make release candidate builds available for
download and from maven central repository so early adopters can try
them easily. But we also need to have release candidates clearly marked
as such so more
But we have never made the RCs available from Maven Central.
http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22org.apache.maven%22%20AND%20a%3A%22maven-core%22
Show me an RC version in that list!
On 5 December 2011 14:30, Igor Fedorenko i...@ifedorenko.com wrote:
This approach fails to make
2011/12/5 Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com:
Personally, I'd rather burn 3.0.4 and have 3.0.5, 3.0.6, etc
version numbers are cheap...
if anyone asks what happend to 3.0.4, we just say, oh that was not
released, there's a tag of it in svn, but there are no binaries or source
Well I would say, given the confusion over RCs or not RCs that when you
spin the official build, just build it as 3.0.5 so that there is no
official 3.0.4 and anyone who had one of the first two RCs can be clear
that it was an RC
On 5 December 2011 14:33, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Fair enough. I confused RC with alpha/beta versions we had in the past.
I can't recall if RCs were available from download page, though.
--
Regards,
Igor
On 11-12-05 9:33 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
But we have never made the RCs available from Maven Central.
Totally agreed, my point was uniqueness and reproducabilty, so 3.0.5 etc.
would be perfect IMO.
Regards Mirko
--
Sent from my phone
http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com
http://github.com/mfriedenhagen/
https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/
On Dec 5, 2011 3:18 PM, Stephen Connolly
Thanks to you for the test sample.
I will cancel the vote and investigate more on monday (as not sure to
have enough time on this sunday)
My first impression is a side effect of this fix:
https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/AETHER-91.
But need more investigation.
--
Olivier
2011/12/4 Dan Tran
Hello,
The vote is cancelled due to the issue found by Dan.
I will restart a vote when a fix will be available.
2011/12/1 Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hello,
The vote is cancelled due to the issue found by Dan.
I will restart a vote when a fix will be available.
An RC candidate I hope...
2011/12/1 Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu wrote:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hello,
The vote is cancelled due to the issue found by Dan.
I will restart a vote when a fix will be available.
An RC candidate I hope...
Do you work
2011/12/4 Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hello,
The vote is cancelled due to the issue found by Dan.
I will restart a vote when a fix will be available.
An RC candidate I hope...
That will be a surprise :-)
I was off today
Again I start a release process and produce a candidate for release
build with a naming 3.0.4 for 5 days vote.
Something failed, so it has been fixed and I restarted a vote with a
second candidate for release called 3.0.4 for 5 days vote.
(retagging etc )
What is the difference with
2011/12/3 Dan Tran dant...@gmail.com:
When using 3.0.4 with appassemble-maven-plugin to generate java
wrapper scripts which use snapshot dependency. The plugin places the
dependencies to its lib/repo directory using timestamp snapshots
picked up from maven repo, but generated scripts using
The RCs were started for a very specific reason, to improve the
quality of our releases. Just breezing through this thread, there are
clearly issues with memory and some other stuff here that may be
bigger than we understand in this small testing surface. An RC build
will get more eyes and either
Please change subject as it's not related to the vote thread.
2011/12/3 Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu:
The RCs were started for a very specific reason, to improve the
quality of our releases. Just breezing through this thread, there are
clearly issues with memory and some other stuff here that
here is sample pom.xml to reproduce the issue. 3.0.3 generate the
correct lib dir, and script, but not 3.0.4
project xmlns=http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0;
xmlns:xsi=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
xsi:schemaLocation=http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0
Thanks!
It looks an erroneous file is picked when it has been download from a
remote repo and when it's reinstall locally (use case of appassembler
which reinstall file locally)
investigating...
2011/12/3 Dan Tran dant...@gmail.com:
here is sample pom.xml to reproduce the issue. 3.0.3 generate
Thanks for looking into this issue. consider it is a blocking
regression since there is no work around for me to use 3.0.4
\-D
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Thanks!
It looks an erroneous file is picked when it has been download from a
remote repo and
+1
runs fine here, artifacts look good.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org
To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2011 10:20 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2)
Hello,
I'd like
+1
Kristian
Den 01.12.2011 13:16, skrev Arnaud Héritier:
+1
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Anders Hammarand...@hammar.net wrote:
+1
Checksums are now created correctly when deploying a snapshot to
Codehaus's Nexus instance.
/Anders
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:08,
+1 (non binding).
Baptiste
2011/12/2 Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com
+1
Kristian
Den 01.12.2011 13:16, skrev Arnaud Héritier:
+1
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Anders Hammarand...@hammar.net wrote:
+1
Checksums are now created correctly when deploying a
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:20:55 +0100
Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
+1 since was ok to me (without the deploy bug)
thanks,
Tony (non-binding)
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
+1
Been using it all day for a variety of things and haven't run into any issues.
Dan
On Thursday, December 01, 2011 10:20:55 AM Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
I've done several medium sized builds and everything looks okay here.
+1
On 12/1/11 4:20 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500version=17215
Note
When using 3.0.4 with appassemble-maven-plugin to generate java
wrapper scripts which use snapshot dependency. The plugin places the
dependencies to its lib/repo directory using timestamp snapshots
picked up from maven repo, but generated scripts using '-SNAPSHOT' for
its classpath.
this breaks
+1
Emmanuel
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500version=17215
Note the difference with first
+1 (non-binding) used it on a couple of builds without problems.
Regards Mirko
--
Sent from my phone
http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com
http://github.com/mfriedenhagen/
https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/
On Dec 3, 2011 2:33 AM, Emmanuel Venisse emmanuel.veni...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500version=17215
Note the difference with first vote is an upgrade of aether to 1.13.1
(to prevent chuncked transfer encoding when
+1
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-Apache-Maven-3-0-4-take-2-tp5038109p5038345.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
+1
Checksums are now created correctly when deploying a snapshot to
Codehaus's Nexus instance.
/Anders
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:08, kreyssel d...@kreyssel.org wrote:
+1
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-Apache-Maven-3-0-4-take-2-tp5038109p5038345.html
+1
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
+1
Checksums are now created correctly when deploying a snapshot to
Codehaus's Nexus instance.
/Anders
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:08, kreyssel d...@kreyssel.org wrote:
+1
--
View this message in context:
Does no one else think it reasonable to do RCs like we have been doing for the
last 2 years?
On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
Olivier Lamy wrote:
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
[...]
Note the difference with first vote is an upgrade of aether to 1.13.1
What about the memory issue that Jörg brought up? Shouldn't we at least
understand the cause and potential impact on other users before
continuing
sure why not for next one.
2011/12/1 Jason van Zyl ja...@tesla.io:
Does no one else think it reasonable to do RCs like we have been doing for
the last 2 years?
On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
Olivier Lamy wrote:
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
[...]
Note the difference with first vote is an upgrade of aether to 1.13.1
What about the memory issue that Jörg brought up? Shouldn't we at least
understand the cause and potential impact on
yes we should have done it...
Lesson to learn for next releases ...
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Jason van Zyl ja...@tesla.io wrote:
Does no one else think it reasonable to do RCs like we have been doing for
the last 2 years?
On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello,
2011/12/1 Jörg Schaible joerg.schai...@scalaris.com:
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
Olivier Lamy wrote:
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
[...]
Note the difference with first vote is an upgrade of aether to 1.13.1
What about the memory issue that Jörg brought up? Shouldn't we at
It's been so long I guess people have forgotten RCs used to be made.
The release of Apache Maven itself is sufficiently different to just a
plugin that a more formal release does make sense, but on the flip side
after all the arguments trying to get this out I guess people just want it
out there
+1 non-binding.
--
Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things — Steven Wilson,
Porcupine Tree
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
We fixed 31 issues.
See release notes:
On 12/1/11 10:27 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
2011/12/1 Jörg Schaiblejoerg.schai...@scalaris.com:
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
Olivier Lamy wrote:
I'd like to release Apache Maven 3.0.4 (take 2).
[...]
Note the difference with first vote is an upgrade of aether to 1.13.1
What about the memory
It seems to me that one of the major values of an 'RC' discipline is
that it's uniquely tagged and bagged we can tell which bugs where
found or fixed in which RC.
This in turn could argue for a scheme in which we vote and release
'milestone' releases: available for general testing, protected by
On 12/1/11 3:25 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
It seems to me that one of the major values of an 'RC' discipline is
that it's uniquely tagged and bagged we can tell which bugs where
found or fixed in which RC.
This in turn could argue for a scheme in which we vote and release
'milestone' releases:
Please change subject thread for such discussion !
Again, I don't have issue with this RC mode and I will take care next time.
--
Olivier go back to hack
2011/12/1 Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com:
It seems to me that one of the major values of an 'RC' discipline is
that it's uniquely
On 12/1/11 3:28 PM, John Casey wrote:
On 12/1/11 3:25 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
It seems to me that one of the major values of an 'RC' discipline is
that it's uniquely tagged and bagged we can tell which bugs where
found or fixed in which RC.
This in turn could argue for a scheme in which we
47 matches
Mail list logo
