I wonder if it makes sense to release 3.3.10 with just the new aether and give 3.4 more time to bake on master.
-- Regards, Igor On Sun, Dec 18, 2016, at 07:33 AM, Robert Scholte wrote: > I did investigate some time in this request. The conclusion is that the > discussion should be in the open and not in the private list of the Maven > PMC. > > What I see are good intended changes, but the results are a chain of > commits where every change fixes one thing but at the same time breaks a > couple of other things. > > I really had hoped we'd reached a point where it was a matter of the last > couple of changes to be able to push 3.4.0, but instead new changes are > introduced and is changing the behavior of Maven a lot. Right now I don't > have a good feeling about this release. Even worse, with every new > attempt > to continue this path by new commits will reduce my confidence in Maven > 3.4.0 > > To be able to push Maven 3.4.0 out of the door some critical decisions > need to be made. I might need to call a vote on those options, need to > find the rights wordings though. > > thanks, > Robert > > On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 17:42:46 +0100, Michael Osipov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Am 2016-12-10 um 16:18 schrieb Christian Schulte: > >> It would be cool if someone could answer the questions I raised in this > >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg111298.html> > >> thread. I would still need to remove those system properties from the > >> 'DefaultModelBuilder', for example. > >> > >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg111325.html> > >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg111326.html> > >> > >> IMHO, introduce that damn 'include' scope in 3.4, and be done with it. > >> We cannot change the 'import' scope behaviour for model version 4.0.0 > >> that way but most of the users using that 'import' scope find it useless > >> sooner or later and will probably upgrade to use the 'include' scope > >> sometime in the future, when that is available. Just someone answer the > >> questions. Maybe discuss this at PMC level because the reporters > > > > +1 if PMCs having a problem making import scope work as advertised. I > > still think is that if this is broken -- against the spec -- it must be > > fixed. > > > > Michael > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
