Hi guys, Could it be some work done on integrating archetypes for maven 2.1 ?
What i am thinking about is to enhance the settings model to permit plugins to access some configuration when used without a project. Like the repositories defined in active profiles. Like plugin configuration like in project.build.plugins but only when called without a project. Like the list of archetype groups like for the plugins. Is that premature (for maven 2.2+), or offtopic in this thread ? Some inlined comments follow. Regards Raphaël 2007/8/31, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > As I noted before, if the ITs are reasonably under control with a way > for people to make them and submit them then I will cut alphas everyday. > > Brian is pretty much done. Is that true Brian on the Archetype front? The archetypeng code has moved to apache/maven/sandbox And you were supposed to figure out the JIRA workflow and I am > supposed to do the patch submission policy. > > After this we just warn people and we can cut releases on a weekly > basis. > > I don't think you can reasonably say what can be released when until > people actually start doing some work. Until then we pump out alphas, > my only two requirements were above to have some form of sanity for > people to makes tests for us. > > On 31 Aug 07, at 8:58 AM 31 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'm looking to do a few things towards getting a 2.1 alpha out, and > > wanted to look towards getting 2.1 itself a bit nearer. It seems > > like we have too many things scheduled at the moment for 2.1, so > > here are a few bits I've been looking at and was going to start > > running through. Would be great to hear others thoughts. > > > > 1) 2.1-alpha-1 issues > > > > I would like to cut this back to just the following and start > > working on them: > > * current known regressions > > * integration test failures > > and move the rest to 2.1.x as the 2.1 sorting bucket > > > > Any objections? > > > > 2) 2.1 JIRA > > > > This has about 270 issues + a large number currently unreviewed > > again for us all to go through. I think it needs to be cut down > > dramatically - I'd say ~100 issues should be the target here. > > > > I would map it out as 2.1-alpha-2 thru alpha-4: the highest > > priority / most addressable / related issues from 2.1.x and the > > current 2.1-alpha-1, + the new features from the wiki. I think this > > should be all we plan for 2.1 at this point, and move on to feature- > > complete betas then. We'll also include stuff that gets addressed > > through 2.0.x of course, and anything else that someone gets an > > itch to fix or a patch lands for. > > > > Any objections? If others think this is the right approach, I'm > > happy to go through and produce a list of what I think should remain. > > > > 3) New features > > > > I believe we should categorise these as: required for 2.1, optional > > for 2.1, and the rest as beyond 2.1. I think we should be > > particularly conservative to make sure a 2.1 release happens sooner. > > > > IMO, the required are: > > * decoupling maven-artifact (under way) > > * IT problems > > * shared build context (mostly done) > > * profile activators (mostly done) > > * repository mirroring (generally better ability to define > > repositories, even without the artifact resolution changes) > > * POM loading and building > > * Toolchains > > * Embedder > > * Plugin packs (depends on POM loading as currently defined) > > > > and the optional are: > > * java 5 annotations > > * conflict resolvers > > * artifact handling / artifact resolution spec > > * repository security > > * local repo separation > > * use StAX > > > > I'm also going over the rest of the wiki stuff to help finish up > > the things that still needed putting into the current layout and > > have a couple of other comments. I'll get back to that over the > > weekend. > > > > In my mind, I'd really like to see a realistic chance of 2.1 > > getting out this year, and planning to have 2 or 3 point releases > > next year, each spending time addressing the key issues people > > experience and those that get the most bang for our buck with the > > open JIRAs. > > > > Thoughts? Any volunteers? :) > > > > Cheers, > > Brett > > > > -- > > Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ > > > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven > jason at sonatype dot com > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
