On 29 May 2013 06:49, jieryn <jie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> > wrote: > > I'd like to work on Arnaud's idea of error message enhancement in case a > > plugin fails because of unavailable Sonatype Aether: if you can let me > 12 more > > hours from now, I'll do it tonight > > Version numbers are cheap. Can't we just make an alpha-2? > > I'm just a user, but I'm getting pretty sick of staged alpha releases > being dropped. > > This happened with 3.0.5 as well. Just release it already. They are > alphas. Christ. >
Well for the NOTICE.txt issue, we cannot actually make a release for legal reasons without https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven.git;a=commitdiff;h=b0a83f62 being part of the release. The question is whether it is better to have the first 3.1.0 alpha release be called 3.1.0-alpha-4 or 3.1.0-alpha-1 When people come back and look at the git history, they will see the commits with "[maven-release] Prepare 3.1.0-alpha-1" through to "[maven-release] Prepare 3.1.0-alpha-4" but only see the tag for maven-3.1.0-alpha-4 and they might incorrectly assume that somebody just forgot to push the tag (similarly they could undelete the SVN tag, so this is not a GIT thing) and then you could end up with a situation where the ASF is sued for making a release of Maven without attributing the Eclipse foundation correctly... Yes, I know that specific example is unlikely, but the point is that there is potential for that type of thing... and we have the mailing lists as a record, etc. Jenkins 1.453's borked partial release was enough to convince me that dropping the staging repo and respining with the same version number is probably the lesser evil.... though that might be because I had to go and do some workarounds for some automated analysis and other fancy shit I was doing. I guess my point is that 3 months later I had to go digging and it took quite some time to find out that Jenkins 1.453 was actually a failed partial release and while there were artifacts for jenkins-core published, there were none for jenkins-war. Prior to 1.453 I would have been agreeing with KK's assertion that the ASF version reuse was just madness. But having said all that, if we can find a good way to flag versions as not released (e.g. a release history page or something) I am not against skipping version numbers. Might confuse people though if that meant that the first release of Maven 3.1.0 was 3.1.4 (i.e. if we had not been doing alpha's) > -Jesse > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
