Hudson does support Maven 3 through free-style jobs.

/Anders

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:19, Zac Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Asmann, Roland <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Could someone tell me what the differences between 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 and 3.0
> > are? I am currently running on 2.0.9 and 2.0.10 (depending on the
> > project) and I was wondering if I should start migrating.
> >
> > Currently I am not allowed to upgrade to 3.0 (a 2.x version is still
> > mandatory), but maybe I could at least make a suggestion to switch to
> > 3.0 -- depending on how big the migration would turn out to be.
>
> http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-2.x.html
>
> To sum up:
> 2.1 is broken
> 2.2 requires Java 1.5 and adds default execution IDs for plugins
> 3.0 is the new hotness: works just like 2.2 but better.
>
> If you're already on Java 1.5 or later, then switching to 3.x may
> actually be the easiest upgrade option because of the "better" part.
> Your biggest work will probably be getting approval to update plugins
> to v3-compatible versions.  Once you've done that (or while doing it),
> I recommend that you attempt building all of your existing projects
> with 3.0.1 and fix any errors or warnings; I'm pretty confident you
> can safely do that while still doing official builds with 2.0.x.
> Maven 3 warnings are usually about things you probably should fix
> anyway.
>
> I've been slowly migrating projects away from v2 for release builds,
> but using v3 for all my working builds for some time now, without any
> negative consequence so far.   An earlier reply mentioned Hudson, I
> think to point out that Hudson does not yet support Maven 3 and that
> is a meaningful obstacle for some people.  I'm using maven 2.2.1 for
> CI builds with Hudson for that reason.  In my experience 3.0 is
> *highly* backwards compatible from the user's perspective.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to