2010/8/5 Arnaud Héritier <aherit...@gmail.com>: > Ok, > > Thus talking is good but doing is better ( I know I'm talking more than I'm > doing :-) ) > > Could we have a consensus if we : > - release now the trunk as a beta 2 without Guice and Aether. With that > we'll have a solid base to compare future changes with. We know it is stable > and it is better than beta 1 (it solves some issues like for the site plugin > and also in // builds). If the vote is called now we can deliver it to users > for Monday. > - just after the beta2 release we merge changes required for Aether and > Guice and we start the release process for a beta 3 we'll deliver at the end > of next week.
mvn:release prepare release:perform takes at most 30 minutes so I don't see any harm in firing them both out there. > > With that we'll try to receive feedback from users and we'll easily validate > if problems are related to Guice or Aether by comparing results with both > versions. > At the end of the month we can push out a new beta with all fixes we'll > have. It will be always possible to decide to remove Aether if some of you > have a better solution or aren't satisfied by the change (I would prefer to > have done that in an alpha releases cycle but now we are in beta we cannot > come back in rear). > > WDYT ? I think it is important to push out new releases to show to our > community that we are always active and we are going in the good direction. > > Arnaud > > > On Aug 5, 2010, at 11:06 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > >> Hi all >> >> Some very important questions have been asked regarding Jason's >> proposal. I usually let my first impressions sink in a bit before I >> reply. That often help to make my comments more about the facts and less >> about the feelings, and we've seen a lot of feelings in this thread. >> >> The first thing I would like to happen is that we release 3.0-beta-2 >> *without* merging the proposed code. There are two reasons for this. >> >> 1. The Site Plugin, which most of you know is something that I've worked >> quite a lot on, is currently in limbo. On one hand we have the stable >> 2.x trunk of the plugin which works with Maven 2, but not with Maven 3. >> We also have a 3.0-SNAPSHOT branch of the plugin, thanks to Olivier and >> Hervé. But that currently don't work with any released version of Maven >> because of a bug in Maven 3.0-beta-1. In order to gain momentum and >> field testing for Maven Site Plugin 3.0 it needs a stable version of >> Maven to work with. There are too few people working on the Site Plugin, >> and if it needs to be rewritten yet again there is a risk that it will >> never be ready. >> >> 2. Release early, release often. Give the users a choice here. They can >> choose to use Maven 3.0-beta-2 which will work much like beta-1 did, but >> with lots of bugs fixed. Or a few weeks later they can use 3.0-beta-3 >> the proposed code changes merged in. If the new stuff doesn't work, for >> whatever reason, they can switch back to beta-2 while they wait for a >> bug fixed beta-4. >> >> As for they proposed code bases I am not qualified to make detailed >> comments, so my comments will be very high level. >> >> >> Guice >> >> IIUC this means that we would replace one (external) IOC container with >> another (external) IOC container. If the bar for being allowed to >> participate in the development of Guice is at the same level as it has >> been for Plexus, then I have no problem with this switch. >> >> I am +1 on integrating the Guice code after beta-2 has been released. >> >> >> Aether >> >> One thing that I really think has been successful here at Maven has been >> when we have set up proper APIs that abstracts the implementation and >> let the users pick a suitable implementation for their needs. Two >> subprojects come to mind: SCM and Wagon. >> >> If the API part of Aether is anything like that, then that's a good >> thing in my book. I haven't looked at the code, only the high level >> presentation, but I have high confidence in those who have worked on it. >> Having the API hosted outside of Apache is fine by me if it means that >> more projects will use it. The more the merrier. >> >> When it comes to the implementation I'm undecided. It does mean that we >> will make an integral part of Maven external, which can lead to problems >> with issue tracking etc, as pointed out by others. On the other hand it >> makes sense to use the collective knowledge of the people who is >> responsible for the API, to also work together on implementations. >> Perhaps the Maven repository implementation can be moved back to the >> Maven project, when things have settled down. >> >> I am +0 on integrating Aether after beta-2 has been released. I'll let >> others with more insights decide. >> >> >> On 2010-08-03 20:21, 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) >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Dennis Lundberg >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
