Re: Maven 3.4.0 Release

Mon, 19 Dec 2016 11:37:23 -0800 

+100
On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:12:33 +0100, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> wrote: 


We need to get the project back in the habit of releasing.


My vote is the we rebuild master with a clean history. keep current  
master

as a reference branch, and cherry-pick as we go.

The aim should be kept tight in scope and focus on the aether replacement
only. Minimum change for aether replacement.

Then we can start bringing in bug fixes.

If we need to break things, we can go 3.6.x or 4.x.y I only request that
5.0.0 be reserved for the first release with a modelVersion 5.0.0 pom
(which is what my proposals are aiming to help us flesh out... though my

proposals may not be selected by committers in the end, hopefully they  
will

allow us to have a reasoned debate)

Wdyt?

On Mon 19 Dec 2016 at 17:41, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote:


We're already trying to push a new release for quite some time. And it

seems the discussion is not over yet.


There are a lot of improvements which deserve a release, so personally  
I'd


like to push the discussion to 3.5.0



Robert



On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 14:12:25 +0100, Stephane Nicoll

<[email protected]> wrote:



> Isn't that postponing the discussion we're having here on those

> controversial changes? I'd rather give it an extra effort rather than


> pushing it back and loosing all the context once we have to tackle  
3.5.


>

> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Stephen Connolly <

> [email protected]> wrote:

>


>> I like that plan, but let's call that 3.4.0 and let these other  
changes


>> go

>> for either 3.5.0

>>


>> Does someone want to take a stab at forking master from an earlier  
point



>> (perhaps get infra to let us rewrite master back to the fork point  
and


>> push

>> the current state to a branch?)

>>

>> On Sun 18 Dec 2016 at 19:45, Igor Fedorenko <[email protected]>
wrote:

>>


>> > No, I meant just eclipse->apache move, not all changes that went  
into


>> >


>> > maven-resolver. The idea is to have a release branch we can  
maintain


>> >

>> > while things stabilize in master.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > --

>> >

>> > Regards,

>> >

>> > Igor

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Michael Osipov wrote:

>> >

>> > > Am 2016-12-18 um 18:44 schrieb Igor Fedorenko:

>> >

>> > > > 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.

>> >

>> > >

>> >

>> > > Changing a dependency with so many changes recently in a fix

>> version?

>> >

>> > > Doesn't sound right to me.

>> >

>> > >

>> >

>> > > M

>> >

>> > >

>> >

>> > >

>> >

>> > >

>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>> >

>> > > 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]

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > --

>> Sent from my phone



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



--

Sent from my phone


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]





























					Reply via email to