> I'm +1 on the branches. > I'm +1 on moving the plugins first. Cool - I think we are all in agreement here then.
> I also think we need some more discussion on what's going on, > as I can see > from the current progress that I am going to have to > back-port 1.1 only > stuff to work under 1.0, e.g. multichanges etc. I really > don't want to > have to keep two sets of code in synch for that long. This shouldn't be the case. 1.0 is clearly defined and goes as far as it goes, and we shouldn't need to introduce any 1.1 stuff into it. On the other hand, any changes on the 1.0 branch in the meantime will go into 1.1 as soon as practical. I have the roadmap on the wiki at http://wiki.codehaus.org/maven/MavenCvs - let me know (or edit it) with additional questions of clarifications. > Also, the branching needs to happen to both maven and maven-plugins > modules in CVS, right? No. If an individual plugin is being developed for 1.1 only, it might need to branch itself. But I don't think this would be a wise choice. IT might support both 1.0 and 1.1, and that will be fine as long as it continues to run under 1.0. I think what you are referring to here is POMv4 code in plugins, which is easy to wrap in a <j:if test="${pom.version >= 4}">...</j:if> > Which plugins are currently 1.1 ONLY? Are there any? Does multichanges? Cheers, Brett
