On 14 September 2017 at 04:43, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote:
> > +2 non-binding from Mark! > > I was discussing this with a coworker and he made the comment that if this > change could break Mojos, maybe it shouldn't be in a point release - whats > the policy on changes that may potentially break existing plugins? > Well we need to assess the issue. Right now I don't even have a description of what went wrong. Any chance you could provide a replication... or mail me directly if you cannot share it publically and I may be able to produce a minimal reproduction from it. If this breaks a mojo that was doing something wrong in the first place, well that will not stop 3.5.1... OTOH if this exposes a bug in the issue "fixed" then I'd likely revert and respin. We really need a reproducer first. > > -- > "Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven Wilson, > Porcupine Tree > > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote: > > > On 14 Sep 2017, at 10:26, Mark Derricutt wrote: > > > > Calling -2 for vote if not too late. > > > > Actually - looking at the commit diff, I see in our code we did have > > <extensions>true</extensions> for the jasmine-maven-plugin which we don't > > actually need. Removing that from the mojo definition and running my > build > > with the staged 3.5.1 release and everything builds fine. > > > > +2 non-binding from Mark! > > > > Mark > > ------------------------------ > > > > "The ease with which a change can be implemented has no relevance at all > > to whether it is the right change for the (Java) Platform for all time." > — > > Mark Reinhold. > > > > Mark Derricutt > > http://www.theoryinpractice.net > > http://www.chaliceofblood.net > > http://plus.google.com/+MarkDerricutt > > http://twitter.com/talios > > http://facebook.com/mderricutt > > >
