Hi Dale, I guess that’s a mixture of the groupId-variable problem combined with re-setting the version first without including java7, android and distribution.
The parent is not updated as the plugin seems to work in a way to set the version of an artifact to a given version and update all references to that in the rest. Here I already updated the parent and when re-running it, the plugin didn’t have to change anything so it didn’t update the reference in the parent declaration. The second problem is that the usage-detection of the plugin doesn’t have an IQ of 200 ;-) … by using the variable it simply didn’t see that all these dependencies are also usages and therefore didn’t update them. You remember me not being very fond of the variables in the groupIds as I said that there might be problems in the release … well now we know that for sure ;-) I would strongly suggest getting rid of these variables. I think it would be a good idea to re-set the version of the develop branch to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT and to manually delete the release branch, fix things and give it another try as soon as we fixed everything. Otherwise this would be a cherry-picking nightmare. But as you are on vacation for a few days, I guess there is no rush to fire out a release too soon. Chris Am 07.11.17, 17:23 schrieb "Dale LaBossiere" <[email protected]>: Hmm… also just noticed that distribution/pom.xml still has 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT for its parent decl. > On Nov 7, 2017, at 10:03 AM, Dale LaBossiere <[email protected]> wrote: > > Getting closer :-) > > I see commit 2012640 was added to develop and it changed all the j7 & android poms… but it only changed the parent decl. All of the edgent dependency decls in those poms still have 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT. > > Hmm… looking at those poms, sadly I suspect that’s because of the change I added a while ago to use ${edgent.runtime.groupId} in the dependency decls? I would have expected the maven plugin making the version change to be smart enough to deal with that (i.e., expand the vars when looking for things to change). Not so? Do we have to convert back? > > P.S. the main reason why we use the “all changes via a PR” flow is that it makes it so easy for all to see/review/comment-on the contents of a change via GitHub.
