Okay, sounds good. I thought the warning was more ominous than desired, but after the discussion, seems appropriate. For those who will never see this discussion, I hope the warning isn't as ominous too.
Paul On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Jeff Jensen <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > It's clear, it allows me to continue if I want to try it anyway, and I think > there was plenty of prior discussion of it on the list. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kristian Rosenvold [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 2:57 PM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: Maven 3 versions of the plugins > > The intention of the warning was to make it pretty clear that you're > running with some risk. We have already agreed that the entire > "parallel" feature is to be marked as "experimental" (although with the > explicit adding of @threadSafe to the mojos I personally think regular > "parallel" is good for prime time). > > Fortunately most threading-related failures that happen within plugins > are quite clear-cut. When I started out with this stuff I was expecting > a lot of subtle memory model violations and stuff like that, but there > has been almost none of that. In fact, after we fixed a couple of key > problems in plexus most of the failing plugins fail fairly quickly and > on a reasonably regular basis. > > The only *real* nasty I've seen so far is modello-plugin, which in its > non-thread-safe form produces errors straight out of h*ll > (generated-sources is created under "random" modules - sometimes > switching midway in the source generation process, making it appear to > be compiling the wrong module). All the others I've seen as of now are > fairly mild stuff that usually fail with (some kind of) error message. > > Also note that most of the corruption issues being fixed related to > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSHARED-148 (which is part of JAR/EAR > vote as of yesterday) actually can occur in today's 2.2.1. The fixes > "related to" MSHARED-148 contain only 1 issue that is clearly parallel > only. > > We want users to try this feature. Hopefully also create some pressure > in the community to make plugins @threadSafe. By the time 3.0 releases, > most of the (non-deprecated) core plugins will be @threadSafe > > I'm not really heavily invested in the current solution, but if we were > to fail the build with non-threadsafe plugins I'd want an option to do > it anyway. > > Isn't the current solution noisy enough ? I'm probably coming through > as a bleeding-heart liberal here, I don't like forcing users. I think > it's mostly about controlling expectations and directing users to the > proper places...? > > Kristian > > > ti., 18.05.2010 kl. 13.32 -0500, skrev Paul Benedict: >> Why would Maven allow parallel builds that are not thread-safe? >> Granted, it's the developer's choice to take the chance, but I just >> don't see why it's beneficial to allow builds being potentially >> corrupted unbeknownst to the builder. >> >> 2010/5/17 Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]>: >> > In m3 if you activate the // mode and you have a plugin which isn't marked >> > as compatible you'll have a warning like that : >> > >> > [WARNING] ***************************************************************** >> > [WARNING] * Your build is requesting parallel execution, but project * >> > [WARNING] * contains the following plugin(s) that are not marked as * >> > [WARNING] * @threadSafe to support parallel building. * >> > [WARNING] * While this /may/ work fine, please look for plugin updates * >> > [WARNING] * and/or request plugins be made thread-safe. * >> > [WARNING] * If reporting an issue, report it against the plugin in * >> > [WARNING] * question, not against maven-core * >> > [WARNING] ***************************************************************** >> > [WARNING] The following plugins are not marked @threadSafe in Maven Model: >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-resources-plugin:2.4.2 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-clean-plugin:2.3 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:2.0.2 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-install-plugin:2.2 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.4.3 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin:2.2 >> > [WARNING] org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.1 >> > [WARNING] org.codehaus.modello:modello-maven-plugin:1.3 >> > >> > >> > Arnaud >> > >> > On May 17, 2010, at 11:42 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: >> > >> >> Lots of plugins are up for vote to be @threadSafe with Maven 3. Does >> >> Maven 3 have any mechanism to reject plugins prior to the versions >> >> being released? What happens if someone uses a Maven 2 version? >> >> >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
