On 07/08/2010, at 1:22 AM, Brian Fox wrote: > I'm not so concerned about confusing users with a beta2 and then a > beta3, that can be mitigated easily in the announcement. More releases > won't hurt anyone. > > Let those working on it decide what to do and when presented with a > vote, I'll test, verify and vote accordingly, regardless of if it's > beta2 with or without Aether/Guice. I would just rather see one > sooner rather then later. We too often have a tendency of waiting for > everything to be perfect. They are betas, pick one and stage it I say.
+1 to that Not to extend the thread too much further, but I'd still like to see someone answer my questions about the impact of changing the project's scope by moving the artifact implementation to Aether before that lands anyway. We've had a lot more time to ponder Guice. 1) is there any alternative that would keep what we have today - the Maven implementation and API for Maven plugin developers - within the Maven project, while still allowing Jason's desire to involve more people in an expanded effort? 2) either way, what API are we expecting plugin developers to use for artifact resolution in Maven 3? If it is Aether, what is the impact to plugin developers if the interfaces change after 3.0, or if it moves to Eclipse (or even back to Apache) and changes packaging again? I'm still having trouble understanding the dichotomy between an project intended to evolve rapidly, and wanting to include that in a project (hopefully) nearing release which will be used for years. Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
