Yes, I also forsee the pissing contest unfortunately.
Part of the problem is that there are the same artifacts in both
repositories with differing poms. Which pom is correct?
This makes troubleshooting a nightmare when 2 developers are getting
different results, only to finally find out that
Hi,
On Fri, 16 May 2008 15:25:25 +0200, Tomislav Stojcevich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bad example since version is slightly different but shouldn't be(ga
compared to GA) but still shows pom differences.
Yes, I also forsee the pissing contest unfortunately.
Part of the problem is that there are the same artifacts in both
repositories with differing poms. Which pom is correct?
I vote for the pom maintained by the dev team behind the project - anything
else is an approximiation.
I'm not
I vote for the pom maintained by the dev team behind the project - anything
else is an approximiation.
I'm not saying our pom's are perfect, but at least they are now actively
maintained.
Just my additional 2 cent.
/max
I agree 100%, I think the poms that come from the project team
Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
Yes, I also forsee the pissing contest unfortunately.
Part of the problem is that there are the same artifacts in both
repositories with differing poms. Which pom is correct?
I vote for the pom maintained by the dev team behind the project - anything
else is an
On May 16, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Max Bowsher wrote:
What would be nice, is for automated syncing of all *new* releases to
the jboss repository to be initiated, which surely can't be that
controversial? (Though there may be issues where new releases depend
on
things in the jboss repo that are
On May 16, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
I know you are all quite busy, I can help myself (slowly) but my main
concern is to understand if these problems are
A) known, due the fact nobody completed the migration to maven.
B) You all tested only on IDEA
C) my environment is
Cool, I've almost completed the migration based on 1.4.2
A migration with no issue is like cake without ice: not worth it ;)
On May 16, 2008, at 02:35, Steve Ebersole wrote:
Because 1.4.2 was just released when I did that migration, as I
already answered on that monsterous JBoss dev list
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:51:27 +0200, Sanne Grinovero
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all the tips,
Still I'm unable to build the Hibernate Search project, even using a
clean checkout and
a fresh maven 2.0.9 repository; using JDK 1.5.0_15-b04.
I'm on Linux (LFS), and have installed the
Awesome to see two hibernate developers now spending their energy on
such an important refactoring. Keep up the good work.
Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
Cool, I've almost completed the migration based on 1.4.2
A migration with no issue is like cake without ice: not worth it ;)
On May 16, 2008, at
Good to see Bill Burke being, well Bill Burke.
On May 16, 2008, at 5:09 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
Awesome to see two hibernate developers now spending their energy on
such an important refactoring. Keep up the good work.
Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
Cool, I've almost completed the migration based
11 matches
Mail list logo
