Hello again, I created a JIRA for that change: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-522 and then a new PR: https://github.com/apache/maven-compiler-plugin/pull/169.
These are basically the changes Tamas did in the original PR (https://github.com/apache/maven-compiler-plugin/pull/151), plus some minor changes and one more IT (we discussed the issue with Tamas on that PR and he suggested for someone to "take over", so that's the reason I created a new PR). Andrzej Jarmoniuk (who did similar changes in other plugins) did review and approve the PR (many thanks for that!). It would be great if anyone from the Maven team would be able to take a look as well. Thanks, Petr ------- Original Message ------- On Wednesday, January 18th, 2023 at 18:50, Slawomir Jaranowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > Petr thanks for your contributions. > > I think that first we should finish "Move away from legacy maven-compat", > for me it is a blocker for next issues. > https://github.com/apache/maven-compiler-plugin/pull/151 > We need the issue for the above PR :-) > > Next we can try to resolve the mentioned issues. > > Simply please create PR with a proposition ... if nobody responds with a > review you can ping on dev list. > > > > > wt., 17 sty 2023 o 23:41 Petr Široký [email protected] > > napisał(a): > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I recently started contributing with small changes to some of the Maven > > projects (mainly enforcer and IT repo) and I am now looking where I could > > help further. > > > > One of the areas that caught my eye is the maven-compiler-plugin and > > specifically the annotationProcessorPaths feature. It seems there are quite > > a few open JIRAs with feature requests and bugs. From what I could find: > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-391 > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-395 > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-503 > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-496 > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MCOMPILER-264 > > > > At first I would like to take a look at MCOMPILER-391, which is requesting > > that the dependencies under annotationProcessorPaths use > > <dependencyManagement> to resolve a proper version (instead of requiring > > users to explicitly specify the version as part of the > > annotationProcessorPaths entry). I remember I had to fight with this one > > before as well as a user. > > > > Would that (MCOMPILER-391) be a good place to start, or are there any > > blocker issues / concerns which are the reason this feature have not been > > yet implemented? > > > > Also, would there be anyone specifically interested in maybe reviewing the > > proposed changes? Or should I just open the PRs and someone will eventually > > take a look? > > > > Thanks, > > Petr > > > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
