Yeah, that sounds reasonable in theory but I've seen these nice guys do their thing first hand while contributing code back to the project.
They don't do any reasonable amount of testing at all. I used a released and theoretically stable plugin (is in the core ibiblio repo) and it just flat out didn't work. They did the same kind of stuff with surefire too. (the current theoretical stable release of that is a huge pile of doo-doo btw, it does execute with the latest testng versions but has also reverted back to creating unwanted test-output directories all over the place as well as creating a single "Command Line Suite.txt" output report with no incremental progress indicator for which test is being run) Bah. On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Christian Edward Gruber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This very issue is at the core of current design decisions for both > Maven 2.1 and updates along the 2.0.x branch. They're pretty close to > finding a decent way to stabilize plugin sets. I suspect by next > release of 2.0.x there will be a "default set" of plugins for that > version of maven that you can override, but unless you do, you'll get > that set of working plugins. > > And for the record, they are decent people trying very hard to solve a > variety of problems with a very diverse set of users with vastly > different priorities. This is a community, and some respectful > collegiality is not out of line here. They may seem retarded to you, > but I've heard the same thing from jerks I've worked with who bitch > and complain about how flakey Tapestry is and how they chose web-works > instead because of it. This would all go a lot better if people > stopped bitching and consulted with each other and/or contributed code > (and yes, I've contributed patches, not to this project, but to > continuum, wotonomy, openbsd, and others). Your stress is totally > valid, and I agree that plugin sets should be stable. On the other > hand, however, if you lock down your plugins as per all the best > practices discussed on the Maven users list, you would also obviate > this problem until they have it resolved in the default tool behaviour. > > Christian. > > > > > On 12-Feb-08, at 10:58 , Jesse Kuhnert wrote: > > > Just a warning that something funky seems to have happened lately as > > we've lost the majority of documentation for anything not on the main > > Tapestry 4.1 site. (ie core / contrib / annotations / etc) > > > > You can see this if you click on "Tapestry Core / Contrib" from the > > left hand menu on the 4.1 site at > > http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4.1/. > > > > I'm not sure what to do about this right now but it seems like it's > > probably concerning enough that I may be forced to take drastic action > > to get it fixed. > > > > F-ing asshole maven developers. ....I swear they seem so f-ing > > retarded sometimes. > > > > -- > > Jesse Kuhnert > > Tapestry / OGNL / Dojo team member/developer > > > > Open source based consulting work centered around > > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > > -- Jesse Kuhnert Tapestry / OGNL / Dojo team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
