There doesn't seems a strong agreement on that so maybe the status quo
until reach is saner no?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog
<https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old
Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
<https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064>
Javaccino <https://javaccino.dev/> founder (Java/.NET service - contact via
linkedin)

Le dim. 18 oct. 2026, 07:55, Gerd Aschemann <[email protected]> a écrit :

> Good Morning,
>
> The preparation is done and reviewed, so I'm starting the switch now.
>
> I'm beginning with a single pilot, so we can validate the whole
> procedure end to end before touching the rest: maven-filtering
>
>   https://github.com/apache/maven-filtering/pull/412
>
> It has only one open PR and is already released, which makes it the
> lowest-risk candidate.
>
> For each repository the swap is:
>
>   - rename the current default "master" (Maven 4 line) to <repo>-4.x
>   - rename <repo>-3.x to "master" (restored as the default branch,
>     coordinated with INFRA)
>   - a committer merges the prepared pre-staging PR so the new master
>     carries the repo-wide default-branch configuration (.asf.yaml,
>     .github, Jenkins badges) that GitHub and ASF infra only read from
>     the default branch
>
> GitHub auto-retargets the open PRs on rename, so contributors'
> existing PRs are preserved.
>
> Two components are intentionally held back from today's batch:
> maven-archiver and maven-jar-plugin, because their release votes are
> not officially closed yet. They will follow in a separate, later swap
> once released.
>
> Once the pilot looks good I'll continue with the remaining components
> and report progress here.
>
> As of now, I have no approval for m-compiler-p and m-archiver as well as
> m-jar-p have pending release votes.
> Therefore, I will postpone all three until this is sorted out.
>
> Runbook: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/85fwGg
>
> Regards,
> Gerd
>
> > On 6. Oct 2026, at 10:45, Gerd Aschemann <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Following up on Hervé's call to lead the Git work for maven-sources#57 <
> https://github.com/apache/maven-sources/issues/57>: a handful of
> Maven-4-specific plugins and shared components currently have their default
> master branch on the Maven 4 line, with a <repo>-3.x branch for Maven 3.
> That is the reverse of our agreed direction — the default should be Maven
> 3, with Maven 4 as a separate branch until Maven 4 adoption has progressed.
> Concretely, it avoids signalling that users moving to Maven 4.0 must also
> switch to the new (Maven 4 API) plugins; Maven 4.0 is expected to run the
> Maven 3 plugins.
> >
> > This originates from Hervé Boutemy (tracking issue + #maven Slack thread
> <https://the-asf.slack.com/archives/C7Q9JB404/p1789896368528809>); the
> full plan / runbook is on Confluence <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/85fwGg>.
> >
> > Scope (plugins / components only, NOT Maven core):
> >
> > core plugins: clean, compiler, deploy, install, resources
> > packaging: jar, source
> > shared: archiver, filtering
> > special case: plugin-tools — no swap; master stays Maven 3 (drop the
> -3.x branch, rename the version to 3.17.0-SNAPSHOT).
> > The target branch name stays master (not main); a move to main, if ever,
> should be a separate global decision, not a side effect of this.
> >
> > Method — rename, not force-push:
> >
> > rename master (Maven 4) → <repo>-4.x
> > rename <repo>-3.x (Maven 3) → master
> > Renaming the base branch makes GitHub retarget open PRs automatically,
> so merge bases and PR history are preserved (~45 open PRs across these
> repos).
> >
> > Impact on forks: renaming the upstream branches does not touch forks. A
> fork's master keeps the old (Maven 4) content and its default branch is
> unchanged; each fork owner realigns their own branches afterwards (e.g.
> rename their master → <repo>-4.x and track the new upstream master = Maven
> 3). Open PRs from forks keep working — GitHub retargets their base on the
> upstream rename. This is a one-time, per-fork manual step; it will be
> documented, and those of us with forks (myself included) will handle our
> own as a follow-up.
> >
> > Plan:
> >
> > Execution approach agreed with INFRA: INFRA performs the two
> protected-branch renames per repo by hand; we handle .asf.yaml, default.xml
> and README. Rehearsed on a throwaway fork first.
> > One low-risk first test (maven-filtering, 1 open PR), verify, then the
> rest en bloc — in a single coordinated window, timed with the plugin
> maintainers and outside any open staging/release vote.
> > Timing: from ~16 October (after Community over Code).
> > Communication: to avoid noise I'll keep updates in this thread rather
> than per-repo mails — a heads-up when we start with maven-filtering, and
> one when starting the batch and when it is done.
> >
> > Please raise any objection — here or on maven-sources#57 <
> https://github.com/apache/maven-sources/issues/57> — before we start
> (targeting the weekend of 19 October, after the CoC@Glasgow). Feel free
> to comment on Slack or Confluence as well.
> >
> > Thanks, Gerd
> >
> > --
> > Gerd Aschemann (er/he) --- Veröffentlichen heißt Verändern (Carmen
> Thomas)
> > +49/173/3264070 -- [email protected] -- https://aschemann.net
> >
>
> --
> Gerd Aschemann --- Veröffentlichen heißt Verändern (Carmen Thomas)
> +49/173/3264070 -- [email protected] -- http://www.aschemann.net
>
>

Reply via email to