Hi Brett, personally I agree with David's statement. I also tried to convert our complex M102 build to M2, but I stopped the effort for now until my blockers are fixed.
Brett Porter wrote on Tuesday, December 20, 2005 11:39 PM: > I think some heavy clarifications need to be put on this. > [snip] > > I'm not sure what core issues are being referred to - but I don't > recall seeing anything marked as a blocker for some time (the 6 in > JIRA are for the ant tasks, the embedder, and design issues for 2.1 - > none of which are under discussion here). Well, it depends on your personal view of a bug. My show-stoppers are MNG-1577 and MNG-1571 and the non-forking surefire. As long as I cannot define which exact version of a dependent artifact is used (and included in wars or ears) without explicitly specifying them on each pom again and again, I cannot use M2. Also anything that prevents me from building the exactly same artifact on different machines is not be acceptable from a QA PoV (related to MNG-1609). > Another factor is a large investment in custom Maven 1.x scripts > within some organisations. That's not something Maven 2 can do a lot > about, and is a trade off for the person upgrading. This gets for me on top. > Hope this helps in clarifying it. It's important that anyone who says > it is not yet ready for production states a reason so we can focus on > improving that experience. Done so. I really think M2 has a bright future and I enjoy it, but currently for our company it is also not ready for prime time. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
