ok, I added a doc to add a protocol and improved the error message [1]

I think we can safely do the change proposed in MSITE-598: users won't be lost 
(of course, they'll need to read the error message...)

Regards,

Hervé

[1] http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSITE-599

Le dimanche 24 juillet 2011, Benson Margulies a écrit :
> A thought: since 'extensions' has no 'management' or inheritance
> control, the use of it is actually harder and more obscure when people
> want to use other versions. It's far easier to just manage
> dependencies of the site plugin via pluginManagement. So, I'm in favor
> of using and documenting dependencies rather than extensions.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> 
wrote:
> > I've already made a jira-issue for it, MSITE-598 [1]. I think we should
> > stay consistent: specify wagons with extensions.We just need to document
> > this very well, both on the site and the failure-message, including the
> > required xml to add to the pom. -Robert [1]
> > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSITE-598 > From: [email protected]
> > 
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: Is Maven Site Plugin 3.0-beta-4 ready for release?
> >> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 21:56:22 +0200
> >> 
> >> one last decision/documentation point about m-site-p 3 with Maven 3
> >> 
> >> we had a discussion on IRC yesterday with Robert, Mark and Benjamin
> >> about wagon and its change in M3 [1].
> >> 
> >> 
> >> It was about the way we promote configuring wagon protocols in plugins:
> >> - in m-deploy-p, we promote using extensions (and the plugin doesn't add
> >> any wagon provider other that what is available from Maven core)
> >> 
> >> - in m-site-p 3, we actually added a lot of wagon providers as
> >> dependencies (ssh, ftp, webdav, scm:svn), thus they are automagically
> >> available for end user, but this disables extension mecanisms for every
> >> providers added: if you want to change a wagon provider version, for
> >> example, defining it in extension won't work for m-site-p
> >> 
> >> So we have to do a choice between 2 options:
> >> 
> >> 1. be consistent with other plugins, remove every wagon provider from
> >> m-site-p and promote/document configuration done by end-users (either
> >> as extension or dependency). This will be needed notably for scp (which
> >> works automagically in M2) and ftp or scm:svn (which were added in
> >> m-site-p 3.0-beta*): I suppose we need to create a dedicated example.
> >> 
> >> 2. let the multiple wagon providers in m-site-p, which will work
> >> automagically for a lot of protocols, but downloads a lot of artifacts
> >> and disables extensions definition for these protocols: this needs at
> >> least documentation
> >> 
> >> 
> >> So what should we do:
> >> 1. "pure", with good explanations to help users understand what to do
> >> 2. magic at the beginning, but "downloads the internet" and more complex
> >> later ?
> >> 
> >> Please correct if I misunderstood something...
> >> 
> >> Regards,
> >> 
> >> Hervé
> >> 
> >> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/MAVEN/maven-3x-compatibility-
> >> notes.html#Maven3.xCompatibilityNotes-TransportProtocols%2528Wagons%2529
> >> 
> >> Le vendredi 22 juillet 2011, Dennis Lundberg a écrit :
> >> > On 2011-07-22 00:48, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> >> > > Maven Site Plugin 3.0 is now ready for release (with its
> >> > > documentation) for me
> >> > > 
> >> > > If anybody still has something to change, please explain what so we
> >> > > can fix it and release ASAP
> >> > 
> >> > Thanks for all your work Hervé!
> >> > 
> >> > Now that we plan for 3.0 to be the "main" version of the plugin, there
> >> > are a couple of things I'd like to do:
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 1. Remove any references to the 3.x Subversion branch in the docs.
> >> > I'll do this.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 2. Document the difference between Maven 2 and Maven 3 with regards to
> >> > inheritance that was recently discovered, if it hasn't already been
> >> > done. I'll check this.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 3. Switch the URLs for the deployed sites. We currently have these
> >> > redirects:
> >> > 
> >> > RedirectMatch ^/plugins/maven-site-plugin-2.x/(.*)$
> >> > /plugins/maven-site-plugin/$1
> >> > RedirectMatch ^/plugins/maven-site-plugin-3.x/(.*)$
> >> > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-site-plugin-3.0-beta-3/
> >> > 
> >> > I'd like to change them to this:
> >> > 
> >> > RedirectMatch ^/plugins/maven-site-plugin-2.x/(.*)$
> >> > /plugins/maven-site-plugin-2.3/$1
> >> > RedirectMatch ^/plugins/maven-site-plugin-3.x/(.*)$
> >> > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-site-plugin/$1
> >> > 
> >> > This would also require changing the plugins/index page to point to
> >> > /plugins/maven-site-plugin-2.x/ and /plugins/maven-site-plugin/
> >> > respectively for versions 2 and 3.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 4. Change the deploy site URL in both POMs.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 5. Move the current maven/plugins/trunk/maven-site-plugin/ to
> >> > maven/plugins/branches/maven-site-plugin-2.x
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 6. Move maven/plugins/branches/maven-site-plugin-3.x to
> >> > maven/plugins/trunk/maven-site-plugin/
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > I'll get on 1 and 2 right now.
> >> > 
> >> > 3 I'd like to do after the release, once the deployed site is in
> >> > place.
> >> > 
> >> > 4 needs to be done before the release.
> >> > 
> >> > 5 and 6 can be done either before or after the release, I'd prefer to
> >> > do it before.
> >> > 
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > 
> >> > > Hervé
> >> > > 
> >> > > Le samedi 2 juillet 2011, Dennis Lundberg a écrit :
> >> > >> Hi
> >> > >> 
> >> > >> What's the status on this? I know Hervé worked on extracting a
> >> > >> shared component (maven-reporting-exec) for the Maven 3 specific
> >> > >> parts of the plugin. Did you finish with that?
> >> > >> 
> >> > >> I would like to push for a release of Site Plugin 3 shortly. The
> >> > >> only issue left according to JIRA is this one:
> >> > >> 
> >> > >> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSITE-560
> >> > >> 
> >> > >> There are a lot stuff fixed already, and we need to get this out so
> >> > >> that Maven 3 users can benefit from them. Do we want/need to add
> >> > >> anything more before the release?
> >> > > 
> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > - 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]

Reply via email to