Le 21 févr. 2014 16:39, "Igor Fedorenko" <i...@ifedorenko.com> a écrit : > > I think this is reasonable. > > One observation. Maven does not have an API, plugins and projects can > access pretty much anything from the core. Add to this three distinct > user communities -- (end) users, plugin developers and embedders -- and > I think pretty much any change will break somebody. This means that > INCREMENTAL version component will be more or less reserved for release > respins and many dependency changes will require MAJOR bump. Not saying > there is anything wrong with this, just something we'll need to educated > our users about.
Not sure it's really that feasible for maven core, but wouldn't be at least a part of the solution to clarify what's considered internal and what's considered API/SPI? Maybe renaming or moving some packages to ones containing 'internal' or things like that? At least > > -- > Regards, > Igor > > > > > On 2/21/2014, 10:10, Stephen Connolly wrote: >> >> For discussion... and tearing into... and Chris shouting out that IBM >> supports Java 6 for yonks... >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy >> >> I think we need a version policy and the best way to get one is to put a >> draft together and let people edit it to something that we all can be happy >> with. >> >> Constructive feedback welcome... in fact committers editing the doc is >> encouraged... >> >> Please leave the DRAFT heading at the top. >> >> If a consensus emerges we will have a vote and put the resulting policy on >> the project site as opposed to a draft document on the wiki. >> >> -Stephen >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >
