A thing I forgot to add yesterday : For me Maven is a success because of its fundamentals (rules/guidelines) which allowed to created a large large variety of services with plugins.
The value of Maven is many many more in its plugins than in its core (I don't want to reduce the work done on it which is really important but in term of end user they are using before everything the large set of plugins). To ensure a good future for the project I consider, that we have to do all the necessary to better develop plugins. For me even if I would like to have the time to work on core stuffs which are really interesting, I prefer to try to work on plugins and to animate our community of contributors around them. We don't need 100 developers for core. But for plugins .... It is already a big big challenge to maintain and keep them alive. You can have a look at the list of "official" maven plugins to see the list of latest releases. Even if a big effort where done, there a re always many bugs opened and some plugins weren't released for more than one year. That's also why I'm ready to let Jason/Sonatype drive the core and I'll focus on plugins for the good of the community. Cheers. On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:26 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > Hi, > > Here is my position about these proposals. > > Guice : I understand it will replace the IOC part of plexus. More important > changes in Maven will be done in Maven (>3.0) to fully use the JSR and Guice > itself. For now it is just a technical switch between IOC containers and we > need more real life tests to validate it. Thus +1 for it ASAP. > > Aether : Like others I would prefer to have seen a development done by our > community to replace our current stack which is unstable and complex. That's > not the case (for many reasons) and you (Jason/Sonatype) proposes a new > library you developed and you'll lead in the future. As it was said it will > be a library like any other and we have to choice to take it or not inside > Maven. PRO is its potential quality compared to the existing one (I didn't > yet checked that's why I don't confirm), and CONs is the fact we delegate a > part of our code outside with all problems it could creates (lifecycles not > coherent with maven needs, ..). The fact this one is driven by the same set > of people who are maintaining actively the core is for me a positive point. > And myself I have nothing better to propose. Like many others I have less and > less time to give to Maven (Since 1 year I more focused on the community than > on its development) thus I see this proposal as the better choice we have for > now. Thus let's go for it. My +1. > > Arnaud > > > On Aug 3, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We have two major pieces that we, Sonatype, would like to merge into Maven >> 3.x trunk. >> >> The first are the Guice changes that we've been talking about for a while, >> and the second is the introduction of Aether which is our second attempt at >> a stand-alone repository API. The PMC is aware of Aether as Brian reported >> it in our quarterly report to the Apache Board, but other developers who are >> not on the PMC and the community in general might not know much about it. >> >> I just posted an entry giving a very high level description: >> >> http://www.sonatype.com/people/2010/08/introducing-aether/ >> >> There is a resources section at the bottom of the post for those interested >> in the sources, issue tracking, wiki and mailing lists. As part of some of >> the research we are about to embark on with Daniel Le Berre, Aether will >> likely look more like p2 as time passes and as a final resting place the >> Eclipse Foundation is more likely then Apache. I know people will ask so I'm >> answering that now. Sonatype is just about to fully move Tycho over the >> Eclipse Foundation and we want to see how that goes. If that works, then >> M2Eclipse is next, and then Aether will follow. >> >> At any rate we would like to merge these changes in and make plans to >> release 3.0-beta-2. >> >> So please let us know if you have any objections. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jason >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------- >> Jason van Zyl >> Founder, Apache Maven >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> >> First, the taking in of scattered particulars under one Idea, >> so that everyone understands what is being talked about ... Second, >> the separation of the Idea into parts, by dividing it at the joints, >> as nature directs, not breaking any limb in half as a bad carver might. >> >> -- Plato, Phaedrus (Notes on the Synthesis of Form by C. Alexander) >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
