Sory, I missed time to follow this thread, thanks to benjamin for the ping. I applied MCHECKSTYLE-105 patch as is and did not detect the breacking changes, it can be rollbacked - I will check MCHECKSTYLE-101later.
Following the thread about plugin and Java5 I've created a branch for checkstyle plugin : http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/branches/maven-checkstyle-plugin-java1.4/ This branch at revision just prior this commit, so we can just switch this branch with trunk to get a clean rollback. I could the create a java5 branch and apply MCHECKSTYLE-105 without the breacking changes to codestyle rules you noticed. Nicolas 2009/5/30 Benjamin Bentmann <benjamin.bentm...@udo.edu> > Hi Nicolas, > > just a ping in case the former mails didn't make it through. > > > Benjamin > > > > Benjamin Bentmann wrote: > >> Dennis Lundberg wrote: >> >> it yet myself), you have changed the configuration for >>> HtmlPackage/JavadocPackage compared to how it used to work. IIUC >>> package.html files are no longer allowed in the configurations for >>> Avalon, Maven and Turbine. If we want to change that it's better to open >>> a separate issue for that, and commit that separately. I don't think we >>> should change the behavior, so I am -1 to the change in configuration. >>> >> >> Considering the brekaing effects on existing projects as pointed out by >> Dennis, Paul, Mark and the existing ITs, I agree with Dennis to revert this >> particular part of the commit. The requirement for per-package javadoc seems >> not to meet consensus in our community so the maven_checks.xml does not >> represent community style. >> >> Nicolas, can you comment on this topic please? Among others, there's also >> a question from Dennis about removal of the ASF license header unanswered as >> far as I see. >> >> >> Benjamin >> >
