On 15:35:35 Friday 04 November 2011 Jesse McConnell wrote:
> Perhaps they don't have to make a formal eclipse release, but so long
> as they have parallel ip in place they should be able make a milestone
> or release candidate release.  The formal eclipse 'release' isn't what
> we in maven lands consider a release really, they consider a release
> something that can be 'conditioned' with their pack process and signed
> by the official eclipse key, etc.  It also has to have had release
> docuware created, a static iplog (which is the hold up here) and then
> gone though the release review process (which is generally a couple of
> weeks after its been called for).
> 
> I suspect they should be able to make an RC that you could put into
> central and release maven against though...it would just have to
> contain something like 1.0.0.RC0 as the version to adhere to the
> spirit of the law.  We release jetty rc's into maven central before
> formal 'release' and in some cases its actually encouraged as they
> look for published milestone or rc releases during the release review
> process as a gauge of release maturity (at least I think that is it,
> its been mentioned a couple of times in the last few years)

Well, Probably I misunderstand the discussion but IIRC there was a vote that 
decided that Aether and Sisu will be fine once there is an Eclipse.org release. 
There might really be such difference in what everyone understand as a release 
but an unofficial release on maven central won't be any different than the 
latest 
sonatype releases on maven central.

Alex

> 
> cheers,
> jesse
> 
> --
> jesse mcconnell
> [email protected]
> 
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 06:37, Alexander Kurtakov <[email protected]> 
wrote:
> > On 13:30:12 Friday 04 November 2011 Stephen Connolly wrote:
> >> On 4 November 2011 11:04, Mark Derricutt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > If its stuck at the bottom of the pile for an unknown amount of time -
> >> > I'd REALLY love to see 3.0.4. ship out with the current non-eclipse
> >> > Aether.
> >> > 
> >> > Leaving a broken Maven out in the wild for what appears to be politics
> >> > more than anything just continues to hurt the Maven name.
> >> > 
> >> > I was under the impression that the "move to Eclipse" was only going
> >> > to take 2-3 weeks, whats it been now - 2-3 months almost?
> >> 
> >> This is what we were lead to believe, i.e. that it would be released @
> >> eclipse within a couple of weeks....
> >> 
> >> If it really is going to take much longer then all somebody needs to
> >> do is propose a vote to release with the new one, and then the PMC can
> >> decide on that vote... at the time of the last vote we were told it
> >> would be at eclipse soon... not that a first release from eclipse
> >> would be a long time away...
> > 
> > I doubt that someone can promise a date.  Eclipse releases can happen
> > only after IP clearance is finished and if issues are identified moving
> > to new dependencies or new versions with fixed legal issues might be
> > needed and this might need some effort in different upstreams. One can
> > argue whether such deep reviews should be performed but this seems to be
> > the only way to be at least partly sure that you don't have any obvious
> > legal issues. With my Fedora hat on I can ensure you that we have
> > identified tons of issues during the Package review process.
> > 
> > Alexander Kurtakov
> > 
> >> So if there is a committer willing to step up and ask to use the newer
> >> dependency... please do
> >> 
> >> -Stephen
> >> 
> >> > Mark
> >> > 
> >> > --
> >> > "Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven
> >> > Wilson, Porcupine Tree
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
> >> > 
> >> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> Looking at Eclipse' IPZilla, which btw is accessible to any Eclipse
> >> >> committer, I see currently around 180 open CQs that the IP team needs
> >> >> to deal with, Aether just being one among many projects.
> >> 
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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