On 15/12/2008, at 6:51 AM, jvan...@apache.org wrote:
Modified: maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml?rev=726521&r1=726520&r2=726521&view=diff = = = = = = = = ====================================================================== --- maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml (original) +++ maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml Sun Dec 14 11:51:59 2008 @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ <version>${project.version}</version> </dependency> <dependency> - <groupId>org.apache.maven.shared</groupId> - <artifactId>maven-shared-model</artifactId> + <groupId>org.sonatype.spice</groupId> + <artifactId>model-builder</artifactId> </dependency> </dependencies> <build>
I can't believe I even have to say this, but moving components critical to the function of Maven out of our subversion repository is not a way to solve the problem of unreleased snapshots, IMO. Can you explain to me how this is anything other than a move to route around Apache's release rules? Why couldn't it be done where it was?
I don't buy the argument that it's because it's useful outside of Maven, since one of the great things about Maven is that anyone can reuse it no matter what it is called. Considering the licenses and packages weren't even changed from o.a.m.shared and the ASF header for a version 1.0, I guess that's not the issue.
Like Plexus, I know well enough how often developing on Maven is going to require digging into the code for such dependencies as this and the plugin manager, and probably making changes to fix bugs in the future. This move will be a barrier to some of the Maven committers.
Could you please make clear what your intentions are? Are you intending to move anything else?
Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
