2009/2/9 John Casey <jdca...@commonjava.org>: > I'll rearrange the JIRA versions today, then...it looks like we're all in > agreement about moving directly toward 2.1.0 generally. > > As for the parallel download issue, I guess I'm mainly concerned about > hidden race conditions, deadlocks, etc. Just because there are 400 people > using it (guessing, I have no idea how many people use Don's builds) doesn't > mean they've covered all of the use cases currently active in the Maven > community. > > Since I do understand how hard it can be to nail down concurrency issues in > any sort of standardized way (the grid builds might be one way, since the > VMs have multiple CPUs), I understand that we could probably test this for > another month to the exclusion of everything else and still not be 100% > sure. So, fine...this is 2.1.0 we're talking about, not 2.1.1, right? > Anything ending in ".0" is bound to have some small trouble. > > To keep from killing all of our users in the event something does go wrong > (remember, this is central to everything Maven does), I'd be happiest with > putting in place a switch between new and old style resolution. Maybe we can > do this by simply introducing a "switching" resolver implementation as the > component used everywhere by everything, then allowing Maven to set a flag > on that implementation to let it determine internally which "real" > implementation to use...a copied-and-patched version that constitutes the > parallel option, or the old one. > > I'm +1 for including it and providing an opt-out switch to turn it off. If > we can make that switch stick permanently via the settings.xml, so much the > better. > > WDYT?
+1000 > > -john > > Brett Porter wrote: >> >> (for some reason this got bounced as spam earlier, so I rewrote it and >> chopped the quotation in the hope it gets through...) >> >> I thought this was already the direction we were going... (see "releasing >> 2.0.10" thread). >> >> I already suggested we drop the auto parent version and PGP stuff from the >> roadmap, and I'm all for getting to a final release ASAP. >> >> Personally, I would still like to give the Doxia change a trial - and >> should it prove to have *any* problems we pull it back to 2.2. I think this >> is causing the Doxia guys some grief - so I'd like to hear from them. I'm >> probably 50/50 on parallel downloads - would prefer to see it in, but not if >> it requires a lot of integration work or causes problems. >> >> We do need the password security changes finished. Oleg, are you working >> on the docs or should I put them together based on your blog? Is there >> anything else left to do in the code? I think that dependency needs to be >> out of alpha before we go final - I think we discussed that sort of criteria >> for external dependencies a while back. >> >> 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
