On 9/3/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3 Sep 07, at 4:29 PM 3 Sep 07, Brett Porter wrote: > > > > > On 04/09/2007, at 5:49 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch > >> merged into the decoupled version > > > > This should hopefully already be the case, > > I don't believe Mark has done it yet. Don't know what Carlos has done.
my changes are in both trunk/artifact and 2.0.x branch > > > I try and keep an eye on merges and flag stuff that isn't going > > trunk first. Probably a good idea for everyone that's done recent > > stuff on artifact to check for themselves though - Mark, Carlos? > > > >> and we need to collect all the filters that are floating around > >> all over the place. I think the filters can be in a separate tree > >> and we can decide what we want to shade in by default but we need > >> to collect this before doing a release. > > > > Sorry, bit dense this morning - can you explain why that's needed? > > To prevent the duplication of filters and to have all related code > together. To date I have not seen any filters that are really > specific to a particular domain, the all appear to be general in > nature. We don't collect them, they will be duplicated. > > > (I understand it's a good thing to get rid of all the duplicate and > > almost-the-same ones, and m-artifact is the right place - just > > wondering if that's becoming a requirement for it to work or not). > > > >> Mark do you want to try and get your changes into the decouple > >> maven-artifact? > > > > Would it be better to hold this until after the release since > > things are pretty stable right now and this might take a bit to > > integrate? > > > > I don't think so, the sooner it goes in the better. It's easy enough > to try it with trunk, we can hold off on 2.0.x but I want to try it > all with 2.1x ASAP. > > >> > >> I will hunt around for filters and make some space in SVN for them. > > > > Does this mean m-artifact will be a multi-module project? > > > > If the filters depend on m-artifact, I don't see why they need to > > be separate? > > > > Just like providers, but they are not numerous when we collect them > (as we might not have many different ones). > > > - Brett > > > > -- > > Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > 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] > > -- 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]
