On 16/12/2010, at 10:00 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > On 2010-12-15 23:03, Jesse Farinacci wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Proposal+--+A+creation+and+retirement+plan+for+plugins >> >>> From the proposal: >> >> 2. Make one final release of the plugin before it is retired. This >> allows us to make a clean break. The final release must change the POM >> so that SCM URLs are removed or changed to reflect the decision made >> in the vote. If the plugin is moved elsewhere a prominent notice must >> be placed on the front page of the plugin's site. The person who wants >> to retire a plugin is the one who does the final release. >> >> This seems wrong to me. Why would we make a final release from the >> official Maven forge and yet have an SCM which points somewhere else? >> This seems really misleading; certainly more-so than a future user >> going to the (now defunct) SCM and not finding the plugin and having >> to do some enlightenment work about where the release is now. > > Right, removing the Source Repository *report* is probably the best way > to go.
Agree. I'd also make the release preferred but optional - there's a good chance you won't get the energy to do that if there's not energy to continue. It probably is on a case by case basis of how many changes have been made on trunk since and if they are valuable to release. I think we can also now recommend apache-extras.org as a suitable forge along with mojo. I'm +1 to the proposal with or without those changes. - Brett -- Brett Porter br...@apache.org http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
