How hard would it be to make a tool to detect the condition where this would cause a problem? Wouldn't you just compare the resolved artifacts with the dependencyManagement section and see where there are differences? Something like a pre-upgrade validator.
-----Original Message----- From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 2:29 PM To: dev@maven.apache.org Subject: Re: [vote] MNG-1577 as the default behavior I agree. Anything that makes a "unpredictable behavior" predictable is a bug fix that should go in a patch. We've had to do all kinds of wacky things to work around unpredictable behavior. (we gotten different behavior depend on the JDK we use, that's bad) 2.0.5 helped in some cases, but this is still needed. Dan On Friday 16 March 2007 14:22, Jason van Zyl wrote: > On 16 Mar 07, at 1:35 PM 16 Mar 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote: > > I agree with Brett, this is a 2.1 change, not a 2.0.x > > Do you fully understand what the current behavior is and what this > patch fixes? You are essentially condemning users to complete > unpredictability. I really think that a build should be staged and > explain to users what the change is and let people build with it. If > we don't get enough feedback or there is a consensus that they think > it's not good then we don't put it in. But we already have many users > who are suffering and asking for this to be the default behavior. > > Jason. > > > Now as Jochen says, nothing prevents pushing stuff from 2.1 to 2.2 > > and get an earlier 2.1, i though we were going to do it anyway. > > > > On 3/16/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 3/16/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Our users must be able to trust point releases are safe upgrades. > >> > Let's start moving on putting out 2.1 milestone releases instead. > >> > >> Agreed. On the other hand, most others seem to consider this change > >> important. > >> > >> So, why not simply renaming 2.0.6 to 2.1 and 2.1 to 2.2? Should > >> satisfy all. > >> > >> Jochen > >> > >> -- > >> Emacs 22 will support MacOS and CygWin. It is not yet decided, > >> whether these will be used to run Emacs or the other way round. > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > >>additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > I could give you my word as a Spaniard. > > No good. I've known too many Spaniards. > > -- The Princess Bride > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >- 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] -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
