Re: A release of maven-checkstyle-plugin is coming shortly
Am 2014-02-22 00:58, schrieb Dennis Lundberg: Hi, If anyone wants to add something to the next release of the Checkstyle plugin, now would be a good time to do it, as I intend to make a release next week. If you need more time to squeeze something in, just let me know. Dennis, I have now opened a few issues [1] of which at least MCHECKSTYLE-216 should re fixed. Michael [1] http://jira.codehaus.org/issues/?filter=-2&jql=project%20%3D%20MCHECKSTYLE%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%202014-02-16%20AND%20created%20%3C%3D%202014-02-28%20AND%20reporter%20in%20%28michael-o%29%20ORDER%20BY%20createdDate%20DESC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help
I've staged 2.5 of the maven-release component. However, the documentation staging process is failing. mvn -Preporting site site:stage does not write into the ~/maven-sites directory where the scm plugin expects it. Could some kind soul either checkout the tag and patch this up and stage it, or commit a fix, or give me a hint? I get on an airplane in 7 hours. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Adopt a version policy and a support policy to go with it.
I think the parts about which JRE to depend upon deserves its own document, because it is something that affects our users much more that which version numbers we use. The same goes for which version of Maven Core a plugin/component can require. That being said, your proposal is a great starting point for discussions about version numbering. Maven Core Looking at our history for core, the 18 month rules in there are a bit hard I think. That would mean that 3.0.x would be EOL now. Having a fixed time is good, I just think that it needs to be longer. But that also depends on our cadence of minor releases going forward. Maven Plugins The current proposal is a huge step from what we currently do, in terms of version lines. I can't recall a single maintenance line or security line from memory. The only maintenance line that I know of has been for the Site Plugin, where we kept one the the previous MAJOR version, i.e. 2.x. Provided we do not change Maven version or Java version I think that we can live with just a development line. Should any security vulnerabilities be found, we can just fix it in trunk and release a patch version. Or if to much has happened on trunk, create branch from the previous MAJOR.MINOR and do a patch release from it. Maven Shared Components As for plugins the proposal is a big step from what we do today. Do we have the time and man hours to maintain for example four versions of wagon? On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, 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 -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Maven Release version 2.5
Hi, maven-release is a component that provides the maven-release-manager and the maven-release-plugin. This release integrates version 1.9 of Maven SCM, which addresses a number of problems with git. We resolved 10 issues: ** Bug * [MRELEASE-166] - release:prepare should always check for local modifications * [MRELEASE-263] - Interactive plugins cannot work in forked executions * [MRELEASE-581] - Git relative pathing broken with release plugin * [MRELEASE-719] - No error when release:prepare with an already existing scm tag * [MRELEASE-812] - "prepare" does not commit before tagging and therefore deploys snapshot instead of release * [MRELEASE-862] - Upgrade to Apache Maven SCM 1.9 ** Improvement * [MRELEASE-682] - support for git svn ** New Feature * [MRELEASE-431] - Configuration of policy for calculating next (release) version ** Task * [MRELEASE-356] - deprecate the automated release profile * [MRELEASE-753] - Upgrade to JUnit 4.x There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-512?jql=project%20%3D%20MRELEASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008 http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008/org/apache/maven/release/maven-release/2.5/maven-release-2.5-source-release.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-release-source-release.zip sha1: 28311e1bb0f1cee37f66e28700e03d4644d4b3ac Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/maven-release-archives/maven-release-2.5/ Guide to testing staged releases: http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Release version 2.5
+1 - binding. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > Hi, > > maven-release is a component that provides the maven-release-manager > and the maven-release-plugin. > > This release integrates version 1.9 of Maven SCM, which addresses a > number of problems with git. > > We resolved 10 issues: > > > > ** Bug > * [MRELEASE-166] - release:prepare should always check for local > modifications > * [MRELEASE-263] - Interactive plugins cannot work in forked executions > * [MRELEASE-581] - Git relative pathing broken with release plugin > * [MRELEASE-719] - No error when release:prepare with an already > existing scm tag > * [MRELEASE-812] - "prepare" does not commit before tagging and > therefore deploys snapshot instead of release > * [MRELEASE-862] - Upgrade to Apache Maven SCM 1.9 > > > > ** Improvement > * [MRELEASE-682] - support for git svn > > ** New Feature > * [MRELEASE-431] - Configuration of policy for calculating next > (release) version > > > ** Task > * [MRELEASE-356] - deprecate the automated release profile > * [MRELEASE-753] - Upgrade to JUnit 4.x > > > > There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-512?jql=project%20%3D%20MRELEASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC > > Staging repo: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008 > http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008/org/apache/maven/release/maven-release/2.5/maven-release-2.5-source-release.zip > > Source release checksum(s): > maven-release-source-release.zip sha1: > 28311e1bb0f1cee37f66e28700e03d4644d4b3ac > > Staging site: > http://maven.apache.org/maven-release-archives/maven-release-2.5/ > > Guide to testing staged releases: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html > > Vote open for 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help
Never mind, I found the shell script left behind by the last person who did this. I On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > I've staged 2.5 of the maven-release component. However, the > documentation staging process is failing. > > mvn -Preporting site site:stage > > does not write into the ~/maven-sites directory where the scm plugin expects > it. > > Could some kind soul either checkout the tag and patch this up and > stage it, or commit a fix, or give me a hint? I get on an airplane in > 7 hours. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[GitHub] maven-surefire pull request: SUREFIRE [1048] Surefire does not use...
GitHub user Tibor17 opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/34 SUREFIRE [1048] Surefire does not use the total amount of threads specif... ...ied by threadCount This is optimization of thread counts limited to the real number of parallel JUnit Runners. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/Tibor17/maven-surefire s2 Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/34.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #34 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. To do so, please top-post your response. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Adopt a version policy and a support policy to go with it.
I guess we need to clear up what I mean by a maintenance line... We *can/may* cut releases on maintenance / security line... Does not mean we *will* more that for non-security/maintenance lines there is ZERO possibility of us cutting a release... On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Dennis Lundberg wrote: > I think the parts about which JRE to depend upon deserves its own > document, because it is something that affects our users much more > that which version numbers we use. The same goes for which version of > Maven Core a plugin/component can require. That being said, your > proposal is a great starting point for discussions about version > numbering. > > Maven Core > > Looking at our history for core, the 18 month rules in there are a bit > hard I think. That would mean that 3.0.x would be EOL now. Having a > fixed time is good, I just think that it needs to be longer. But that > also depends on our cadence of minor releases going forward. > > Maven Plugins > > The current proposal is a huge step from what we currently do, in > terms of version lines. I can't recall a single maintenance line or > security line from memory. The only maintenance line that I know of > has been for the Site Plugin, where we kept one the the previous MAJOR > version, i.e. 2.x. > > Provided we do not change Maven version or Java version I think that > we can live with just a development line. Should any security > vulnerabilities be found, we can just fix it in trunk and release a > patch version. Or if to much has happened on trunk, create branch from > the previous MAJOR.MINOR and do a patch release from it. > > Maven Shared Components > As for plugins the proposal is a big step from what we do today. Do we > have the time and man hours to maintain for example four versions of > wagon? > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, 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 > > > > -- > Dennis Lundberg > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sent from my phone
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Release version 2.5
I didn't yet tested it. Is it supposed to support git 1.9? I had some some feedback that it didn't work but for now I didn't investigate. I'm not sure if something was reported about it. — Sent from Mailbox for iPhone On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > Hi, > maven-release is a component that provides the maven-release-manager > and the maven-release-plugin. > This release integrates version 1.9 of Maven SCM, which addresses a > number of problems with git. > We resolved 10 issues: > ** Bug > * [MRELEASE-166] - release:prepare should always check for local > modifications > * [MRELEASE-263] - Interactive plugins cannot work in forked executions > * [MRELEASE-581] - Git relative pathing broken with release plugin > * [MRELEASE-719] - No error when release:prepare with an already > existing scm tag > * [MRELEASE-812] - "prepare" does not commit before tagging and > therefore deploys snapshot instead of release > * [MRELEASE-862] - Upgrade to Apache Maven SCM 1.9 > ** Improvement > * [MRELEASE-682] - support for git svn > ** New Feature > * [MRELEASE-431] - Configuration of policy for calculating next > (release) version > ** Task > * [MRELEASE-356] - deprecate the automated release profile > * [MRELEASE-753] - Upgrade to JUnit 4.x > There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-512?jql=project%20%3D%20MRELEASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC > Staging repo: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008 > http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008/org/apache/maven/release/maven-release/2.5/maven-release-2.5-source-release.zip > Source release checksum(s): > maven-release-source-release.zip sha1: > 28311e1bb0f1cee37f66e28700e03d4644d4b3ac > Staging site: > http://maven.apache.org/maven-release-archives/maven-release-2.5/ > Guide to testing staged releases: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html > Vote open for 72 hours. > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Release version 2.5
Maven scm 1.9 does not necessarily correspond to git 1.9. You would need to look at those release notes. On February 23, 2014 10:56:04 AM EST, "Arnaud Héritier" wrote: >I didn't yet tested it. Is it supposed to support git 1.9? I had some >some feedback that it didn't work but for now I didn't investigate. I'm >not sure if something was reported about it. — >Sent from Mailbox for iPhone > >On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Benson Margulies > >wrote: > >> Hi, >> maven-release is a component that provides the maven-release-manager >> and the maven-release-plugin. >> This release integrates version 1.9 of Maven SCM, which addresses a >> number of problems with git. >> We resolved 10 issues: >> ** Bug >> * [MRELEASE-166] - release:prepare should always check for local >> modifications >> * [MRELEASE-263] - Interactive plugins cannot work in forked >executions >> * [MRELEASE-581] - Git relative pathing broken with release >plugin >> * [MRELEASE-719] - No error when release:prepare with an already >> existing scm tag >> * [MRELEASE-812] - "prepare" does not commit before tagging and >> therefore deploys snapshot instead of release >> * [MRELEASE-862] - Upgrade to Apache Maven SCM 1.9 >> ** Improvement >> * [MRELEASE-682] - support for git svn >> ** New Feature >> * [MRELEASE-431] - Configuration of policy for calculating next >> (release) version >> ** Task >> * [MRELEASE-356] - deprecate the automated release profile >> * [MRELEASE-753] - Upgrade to JUnit 4.x >> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: >> >http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-512?jql=project%20%3D%20MRELEASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC >> Staging repo: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008 >> >http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1008/org/apache/maven/release/maven-release/2.5/maven-release-2.5-source-release.zip >> Source release checksum(s): >> maven-release-source-release.zip sha1: >28311e1bb0f1cee37f66e28700e03d4644d4b3ac >> Staging site: >> http://maven.apache.org/maven-release-archives/maven-release-2.5/ >> Guide to testing staged releases: >> >http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html >> Vote open for 72 hours. >> [ ] +1 >> [ ] +0 >> [ ] -1 >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven 3 as their base requirements. What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything distinctive to the version numbers? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Keep in mind that maven 3.0-3.1.x are still java 1.5 and we haven't put a version policy in place. Personally speaking I'm fine with plugins requiring java 1.6 and maven 3.2.1 as a minimum, but I'd rather see 3.3.x get some legs first and I suspect we'll have a few 3.2.x releases as we have EOL'd 2.x On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies wrote: > I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for > components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven > 3 as their base requirements. > > What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on > trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything > distinctive to the version numbers? > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sent from my phone
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
I would have expected our first step would be to set source and target to 1.6, and move the Maven core dependencies to 3.0.x. I don't see why the fact that the core was compiled with target=1.5 would have any impact here. I'd like to avoid a disorganized process of individual plugins and components getting complex stuff into their poms, each one a bit different. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: > Keep in mind that maven 3.0-3.1.x are still java 1.5 and we haven't put a > version policy in place. > > Personally speaking I'm fine with plugins requiring java 1.6 and maven > 3.2.1 as a minimum, but I'd rather see 3.3.x get some legs first and I > suspect we'll have a few 3.2.x releases as we have EOL'd 2.x > > On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for >> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven >> 3 as their base requirements. >> >> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on >> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything >> distinctive to the version numbers? >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > > -- > Sent from my phone - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
For this thread, I'd be content to get a plan for how to manage the poms to reflect the EOL of 2.x. The actual content of those poms can argued over by committing an initial proposal. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > I would have expected our first step would be to set source and target > to 1.6, and move the Maven core dependencies to 3.0.x. I don't see why > the fact that the core was compiled with target=1.5 would have any > impact here. > > I'd like to avoid a disorganized process of individual plugins and > components getting complex stuff into their poms, each one a bit > different. > > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Stephen Connolly > wrote: >> Keep in mind that maven 3.0-3.1.x are still java 1.5 and we haven't put a >> version policy in place. >> >> Personally speaking I'm fine with plugins requiring java 1.6 and maven >> 3.2.1 as a minimum, but I'd rather see 3.3.x get some legs first and I >> suspect we'll have a few 3.2.x releases as we have EOL'd 2.x >> >> On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies wrote: >> >>> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for >>> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven >>> 3 as their base requirements. >>> >>> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on >>> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything >>> distinctive to the version numbers? >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Sent from my phone - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Well let's get the maven dep up to at least 3.0.4. Let's give users an announce that we are moving to only checking java 1.5 compat via animal sniffer and that we will be building plugins with 1.6 or 1.7 On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies wrote: > For this thread, I'd be content to get a plan for how to manage the > poms to reflect the EOL of 2.x. The actual content of those poms can > argued over by committing an initial proposal. > > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Benson Margulies > > > wrote: > > I would have expected our first step would be to set source and target > > to 1.6, and move the Maven core dependencies to 3.0.x. I don't see why > > the fact that the core was compiled with target=1.5 would have any > > impact here. > > > > I'd like to avoid a disorganized process of individual plugins and > > components getting complex stuff into their poms, each one a bit > > different. > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Stephen Connolly > > > wrote: > >> Keep in mind that maven 3.0-3.1.x are still java 1.5 and we haven't put > a > >> version policy in place. > >> > >> Personally speaking I'm fine with plugins requiring java 1.6 and maven > >> 3.2.1 as a minimum, but I'd rather see 3.3.x get some legs first and I > >> suspect we'll have a few 3.2.x releases as we have EOL'd 2.x > >> > >> On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies > >> > > wrote: > >> > >>> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for > >>> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven > >>> 3 as their base requirements. > >>> > >>> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on > >>> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything > >>> distinctive to the version numbers? > >>> > >>> - > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > >>> dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: > >>> dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Sent from my phone > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sent from my phone
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Stephen, can I possibly get you to respond to the the questions about branches (or not) and version numbers for the POM's? On February 23, 2014 2:00:24 PM EST, Stephen Connolly wrote: >Well let's get the maven dep up to at least 3.0.4. > >Let's give users an announce that we are moving to only checking java >1.5 >compat via animal sniffer and that we will be building plugins with 1.6 >or >1.7 > >On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies >wrote: > >> For this thread, I'd be content to get a plan for how to manage the >> poms to reflect the EOL of 2.x. The actual content of those poms can >> argued over by committing an initial proposal. >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Benson Margulies >> >> wrote: >> > I would have expected our first step would be to set source and >target >> > to 1.6, and move the Maven core dependencies to 3.0.x. I don't see >why >> > the fact that the core was compiled with target=1.5 would have any >> > impact here. >> > >> > I'd like to avoid a disorganized process of individual plugins and >> > components getting complex stuff into their poms, each one a bit >> > different. >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Stephen Connolly >> > > wrote: >> >> Keep in mind that maven 3.0-3.1.x are still java 1.5 and we >haven't put >> a >> >> version policy in place. >> >> >> >> Personally speaking I'm fine with plugins requiring java 1.6 and >maven >> >> 3.2.1 as a minimum, but I'd rather see 3.3.x get some legs first >and I >> >> suspect we'll have a few 3.2.x releases as we have EOL'd 2.x >> >> >> >> On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Benson Margulies >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable >for >> >>> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and >Maven >> >>> 3 as their base requirements. >> >>> >> >>> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays >on >> >>> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything >> >>> distinctive to the version numbers? >> >>> >> >>> >- >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: >dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sent from my phone >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> >> > >-- >Sent from my phone -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven 3 as their base requirements. What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything distinctive to the version numbers? Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think some important stuff needs to be considered first: 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a minor version, maybe even a major one. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Michael Osipov wrote: > Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: > >> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for >> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven >> 3 as their base requirements. >> >> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on >> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything >> distinctive to the version numbers? >> > > Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think > some important stuff needs to be considered first: > > 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. Already done and site updated > 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a minor > version, maybe even a major one. I think bumping a major version would be fair and proper... But we don't have a formal policy yet, and a minor version bump might be valid too. > > Michael > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sent from my phone
Re: parent poms release
Am 2014-02-01 11:20, schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY: after m-scm-publish-p 1.0 is released, I intend to release ASF parent pom Then every Maven parent poms please have a look at these if you want to be sure your favorite plugin version + configuration, or you position, is correct Hervé, did you check Maven Parent already? Some plugins are worth upgrading: D:\workspace-4.2\maven-parent>mvn versions:display-plugin-updates [INFO] Scanning for projects... [INFO] [INFO] [INFO] Building Apache Maven 24-SNAPSHOT [INFO] [INFO] [INFO] --- versions-maven-plugin:2.1:display-plugin-updates (default-cli) @ maven-parent --- [INFO] [INFO] The following plugin updates are available: [INFO] maven-checkstyle-plugin 2.10 -> 2.11 [INFO] maven-jxr-plugin . 2.3 -> 2.4 [INFO] maven-release-plugin . 2.4.1 -> 2.4.2 [INFO] maven-surefire-report-plugin . 2.14.1 -> 2.16 [INFO] org.codehaus.mojo:findbugs-maven-plugin .. 2.5.2 -> 2.5.3 [INFO] [WARNING] The following plugins do not have their version specified: [WARNING] maven-scm-publish-plugin . 1.0 [WARNING] org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin 0.10 [INFO] [INFO] Project inherits minimum Maven version as: 3.0 [INFO] Plugins require minimum Maven version of: 3.0 [INFO] [INFO] No plugins require a newer version of Maven than specified by the pom. [INFO] [INFO] [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS [INFO] [INFO] Total time: 8.219 s [INFO] Finished at: 2014-02-23T21:24:11+01:00 [INFO] Final Memory: 11M/27M [INFO] Shall I update those? Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Release version 2.5
On 24 Feb 2014, at 5:12, Benson Margulies wrote: > Maven scm 1.9 does not necessarily correspond to git 1.9. You would need to > look at those release notes. Git 1.8.x changed the output of the human readable 'git status', scm 1.9 ( and quite a few versions earlier ) switched to using the git porcelain output. I've been using 1.9 and done some releases with a manually configured scm 1.9 without issue. Tho I've not yet tested this staged release plugin. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Am 2014-02-23 21:20, schrieb Stephen Connolly: On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Michael Osipov wrote: Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven 3 as their base requirements. What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything distinctive to the version numbers? Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think some important stuff needs to be considered first: 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. Already done and site updated Just had a hard time to find this information on the (front) page. I think a mere: 2014-02-18 End of Life EoL notes, announce is not enough. I would have expected something like this on the front page: Looking for Maven 2? // Either some text // or the link to the EoL announcement. 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a minor version, maybe even a major one. I think bumping a major version would be fair and proper... But we don't have a formal policy yet, and a minor version bump might be valid too. Beside the general draft [1] we do already have two good policies. Even one at Apache APR [2], and semver.org. Micahel [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy [2] https://apr.apache.org/versioning.html#strategy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Release notes for 3.2.1 lost on the Maven homepage
Hi folks, did anyone already check http://maven.apache.org/docs/3.2.1/release-notes.html? The link "See complete release notes for all versions" links to http://maven.apache.org/ and is missing a period. Release notes not available. http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.2.1/ is a 404. http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-all.html does not include 3.2.x, neither does http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-3.x.html. http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi says: "Maven 3.1.1 This is a stable version 3.0.x of Maven for projects that can't upgrade to Maven 3.1 yet." This is obviously, incorrect. AND "Windows 2000/XP" + "C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0_02", seriously? Who has a good overview over that content to fix it? Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Release notes for 3.2.1 lost on the Maven homepage
I forgot: "System Requirements: JDK 1.5 or above" Depends on the Mavn version. Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: parent poms release
I'm still on ASF parent: Maven parent POMs will be later Regards, Hervé Le dimanche 23 février 2014 21:25:35 Michael Osipov a écrit : > Am 2014-02-01 11:20, schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY: > > after m-scm-publish-p 1.0 is released, I intend to release ASF parent pom > > Then every Maven parent poms > > > > please have a look at these if you want to be sure your favorite plugin > > version + configuration, or you position, is correct > > Hervé, > > did you check Maven Parent already? > > Some plugins are worth upgrading: > > D:\workspace-4.2\maven-parent>mvn versions:display-plugin-updates > [INFO] Scanning for projects... > [INFO] > [INFO] > > [INFO] Building Apache Maven 24-SNAPSHOT > [INFO] > > [INFO] > [INFO] --- versions-maven-plugin:2.1:display-plugin-updates > (default-cli) @ maven-parent --- > [INFO] > [INFO] The following plugin updates are available: > [INFO] maven-checkstyle-plugin 2.10 > -> 2.11 > [INFO] maven-jxr-plugin . 2.3 > -> 2.4 > [INFO] maven-release-plugin . 2.4.1 -> > 2.4.2 > [INFO] maven-surefire-report-plugin . 2.14.1 > -> 2.16 > [INFO] org.codehaus.mojo:findbugs-maven-plugin .. 2.5.2 -> > 2.5.3 > [INFO] > [WARNING] The following plugins do not have their version specified: > [WARNING] maven-scm-publish-plugin > . 1.0 > [WARNING] org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin > 0.10 > [INFO] > [INFO] Project inherits minimum Maven version as: 3.0 > [INFO] Plugins require minimum Maven version of: 3.0 > [INFO] > [INFO] No plugins require a newer version of Maven than specified by the > pom. > [INFO] > [INFO] > > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS > [INFO] > > [INFO] Total time: 8.219 s > [INFO] Finished at: 2014-02-23T21:24:11+01:00 > [INFO] Final Memory: 11M/27M > [INFO] > > > Shall I update those? > > Michael > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Release notes for 3.2.1 lost on the Maven homepage
I haven't announced it yet because trying to make all the pertinent changes to the site is tedious. Take a look at the end of the day. On Feb 23, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: > Hi folks, > > did anyone already check > http://maven.apache.org/docs/3.2.1/release-notes.html? > > The link "See complete release notes for all versions" links to > http://maven.apache.org/ and is missing a period. Release notes not available. > > http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.2.1/ is a 404. > > http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-all.html does not include 3.2.x, > neither does http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-3.x.html. > > http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi says: > > "Maven 3.1.1 > > This is a stable version 3.0.x of Maven for projects that can't upgrade to > Maven 3.1 yet." > > This is obviously, incorrect. > > AND > > "Windows 2000/XP" + "C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0_02", seriously? > > Who has a good overview over that content to fix it? > > Michael > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl http://twitter.com/takari_io - In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
Re: parent poms release
So, my 'maven 3' parent project comes after this, in case anyone wonders. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > I'm still on ASF parent: Maven parent POMs will be later > > Regards, > > Hervé > > Le dimanche 23 février 2014 21:25:35 Michael Osipov a écrit : >> Am 2014-02-01 11:20, schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY: >> > after m-scm-publish-p 1.0 is released, I intend to release ASF parent pom >> > Then every Maven parent poms >> > >> > please have a look at these if you want to be sure your favorite plugin >> > version + configuration, or you position, is correct >> >> Hervé, >> >> did you check Maven Parent already? >> >> Some plugins are worth upgrading: >> >> D:\workspace-4.2\maven-parent>mvn versions:display-plugin-updates >> [INFO] Scanning for projects... >> [INFO] >> [INFO] >> >> [INFO] Building Apache Maven 24-SNAPSHOT >> [INFO] >> >> [INFO] >> [INFO] --- versions-maven-plugin:2.1:display-plugin-updates >> (default-cli) @ maven-parent --- >> [INFO] >> [INFO] The following plugin updates are available: >> [INFO] maven-checkstyle-plugin 2.10 >> -> 2.11 >> [INFO] maven-jxr-plugin . 2.3 >> -> 2.4 >> [INFO] maven-release-plugin . 2.4.1 -> >> 2.4.2 >> [INFO] maven-surefire-report-plugin . 2.14.1 >> -> 2.16 >> [INFO] org.codehaus.mojo:findbugs-maven-plugin .. 2.5.2 -> >> 2.5.3 >> [INFO] >> [WARNING] The following plugins do not have their version specified: >> [WARNING] maven-scm-publish-plugin >> . 1.0 >> [WARNING] org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin >> 0.10 >> [INFO] >> [INFO] Project inherits minimum Maven version as: 3.0 >> [INFO] Plugins require minimum Maven version of: 3.0 >> [INFO] >> [INFO] No plugins require a newer version of Maven than specified by the >> pom. >> [INFO] >> [INFO] >> >> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS >> [INFO] >> >> [INFO] Total time: 8.219 s >> [INFO] Finished at: 2014-02-23T21:24:11+01:00 >> [INFO] Final Memory: 11M/27M >> [INFO] >> >> >> Shall I update those? >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
I think that Michael might be over-reading my intentions. I am not trying to start a short-term avalanche of moving components to require 3.0.5. My idea is: 1. We release parents that set up the 3.0.5 dependencies. Call that version Q. 2. Any maintainer who feels inclined to release a 2.2.x-compatible component or plugin is welcome to continue to use parent Q-1. 3. Any maintainer who feels inclined to move a component to the new regime changes the parent version to Q. As far as I am concerned, it might take _years_ before everything under the auspices of this project moves to require 3. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: > Am 2014-02-23 21:20, schrieb Stephen Connolly: > >> On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Michael Osipov wrote: >> >>> Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: >>> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven 3 as their base requirements. What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything distinctive to the version numbers? >>> >>> Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think >>> some important stuff needs to be considered first: >>> >>> 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. >> >> >> >> Already done and site updated > > > Just had a hard time to find this information on the (front) page. > I think a mere: 2014-02-18 End of Life EoL notes, announce is not enough. I > would have expected something like this on the front page: > > Looking for Maven 2? > // Either some text > // or the link to the EoL announcement. > > >>> 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a >>> minor >>> version, maybe even a major one. >> >> >> >> I think bumping a major version would be fair and proper... But we don't >> have a formal policy yet, and a minor version bump might be valid too. > > > Beside the general draft [1] we do already have two good policies. Even one > at Apache APR [2], and semver.org. > > Micahel > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > [2] https://apr.apache.org/versioning.html#strategy > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
On Feb 23, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: > > Just had a hard time to find this information on the (front) page. > I think a mere: 2014-02-18 End of Life EoL notes, announce is not enough. I > would have expected something like this on the front page: > > Looking for Maven 2? > // Either some text > // or the link to the EoL announcement. > Feel free to edit. I'm working on trying to write up better release notes detailing the changes. I probably won't be making any changes to the front-page today before the announcement of 3.2.1. >>> 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a minor >>> version, maybe even a major one. >> >> >> I think bumping a major version would be fair and proper... But we don't >> have a formal policy yet, and a minor version bump might be valid too. > > Beside the general draft [1] we do already have two good policies. Even one > at Apache APR [2], and semver.org. > > Micahel > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > [2] https://apr.apache.org/versioning.html#strategy > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl http://twitter.com/takari_io - The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith
Re: [DISCUSS] Adopt a version policy and a support policy to go with it.
On 24 Feb 2014, at 2:48 am, Stephen Connolly wrote: > I guess we need to clear up what I mean by a maintenance line... > > We *can/may* cut releases on maintenance / security line... Does not mean > we *will* more that for non-security/maintenance lines there is ZERO > possibility of us cutting a release... As another data point, my reaction was the same as as Dennis' on first reading. I think the doc could be simplified - perhaps it is more helpful to describe what will be done, not what can/may be done, but then have avenues to add those when possible. Say, start with the last stable release as a the maintenance/security line, but add others where there are willing volunteers to continue maintaining it. IIUC, if a security issue came in the next few weeks, it'd probably be fixed in 3.2.x and 3.0.x (not upgrading due to some plugin incompatibilities), but not 3.1.x (expected to be a smooth upgrade to 3.2.x). Is that what would realistically happen? On the components/plugins/wagon side, I don't think there's much need for older lines, since there are unlikely to be downstream users that can't upgrade to the latest. The only exception I could think of historically was when Site was maintained for Maven 2. - Brett -- Brett Porter @brettporter http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
RE: Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help
MG>so in your instance why does'nt maven-scm-publish to ~/maven-sites ?? > Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 09:52:12 -0500 > Subject: Re: Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help > From: bimargul...@gmail.com > To: dev@maven.apache.org > > Never mind, I found the shell script left behind by the last person > who did this. I > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Benson Margulies > wrote: > > I've staged 2.5 of the maven-release component. However, the > > documentation staging process is failing. > > > > mvn -Preporting site site:stage > > > > does not write into the ~/maven-sites directory where the scm plugin > > expects it. > > > > Could some kind soul either checkout the tag and patch this up and > > stage it, or commit a fix, or give me a hint? I get on an airplane in > > 7 hours. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >
Re: Release notes for 3.2.1 lost on the Maven homepage
I just published the site with the ref docs and the updated release notes. I don't know how long it takes to sync but you can check anything in SVN. I'll leave them there until the morning, if you want to make any changes feel free. If there are no issues I'll send out the announcement in the morning. On Feb 23, 2014, at 1:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > I haven't announced it yet because trying to make all the pertinent changes > to the site is tedious. Take a look at the end of the day. > > On Feb 23, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Michael Osipov wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> did anyone already check >> http://maven.apache.org/docs/3.2.1/release-notes.html? >> >> The link "See complete release notes for all versions" links to >> http://maven.apache.org/ and is missing a period. Release notes not >> available. >> >> http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.2.1/ is a 404. >> >> http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-all.html does not include 3.2.x, >> neither does http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-3.x.html. >> >> http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi says: >> >> "Maven 3.1.1 >> >> This is a stable version 3.0.x of Maven for projects that can't upgrade to >> Maven 3.1 yet." >> >> This is obviously, incorrect. >> >> AND >> >> "Windows 2000/XP" + "C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0_02", seriously? >> >> Who has a good overview over that content to fix it? >> >> Michael >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > Thanks, > > Jason > > -- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > http://twitter.com/takari_io > - > > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational > and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. > > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl http://twitter.com/takari_io - To do two things at once is to do neither. -- Publilius Syrus, Roman slave, first century B.C.
Re: Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help
If you look at the current parent poms, they generally set up so that site:stage writes to ~/maven-sites/..., so that, later, the scm publish plugin can read it from there. On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Martin Gainty wrote: > MG>so in your instance why does'nt maven-scm-publish to ~/maven-sites ?? > > > > >> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 09:52:12 -0500 >> Subject: Re: Maven-release-plugin and scm site publication: need help >> From: bimargul...@gmail.com >> To: dev@maven.apache.org >> >> Never mind, I found the shell script left behind by the last person >> who did this. I >> >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Benson Margulies >> wrote: >> > I've staged 2.5 of the maven-release component. However, the >> > documentation staging process is failing. >> > >> > mvn -Preporting site site:stage >> > >> > does not write into the ~/maven-sites directory where the scm plugin >> > expects it. >> > >> > Could some kind soul either checkout the tag and patch this up and >> > stage it, or commit a fix, or give me a hint? I get on an airplane in >> > 7 hours. >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
Le 23 févr. 2014 21:20, "Stephen Connolly" a écrit : > > On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Michael Osipov wrote: > > > Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: > > > >> I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for > >> components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven > >> 3 as their base requirements. > >> > >> What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on > >> trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything > >> distinctive to the version numbers? > >> > > > > Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think > > some important stuff needs to be considered first: > > > > 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. > > > Already done and site updated Was there also an announce on the users list? I couldn't find it. I think it would also be a good thing to do.
Re: Branch the parent pom hierarchy for Java 1.6 + Maven 3
+1 (possibly set the deps to 3.0.4 instead, and not 3.0.5) I don't think we need to branch the parent poms. That will just create unnecessary complexity. As you pointed out, plugins can continue to use the Q-1 version of the parent if the want to go with 2.x-compat (and add/override plugin upgrades/configs if needed). I'm also very positive to "avoid a disorganized process of individual plugins"! /Anders On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > I think that Michael might be over-reading my intentions. I am not > trying to start a short-term avalanche of moving components to require > 3.0.5. My idea is: > > 1. We release parents that set up the 3.0.5 dependencies. Call that > version Q. > 2. Any maintainer who feels inclined to release a 2.2.x-compatible > component or plugin is welcome to continue to use parent Q-1. > 3. Any maintainer who feels inclined to move a component to the new > regime changes the parent version to Q. > > As far as I am concerned, it might take _years_ before everything > under the auspices of this project moves to require 3. > > > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Michael Osipov > wrote: > > Am 2014-02-23 21:20, schrieb Stephen Connolly: > > > >> On Sunday, 23 February 2014, Michael Osipov > wrote: > >> > >>> Am 2014-02-23 19:06, schrieb Benson Margulies: > >>> > I propose to make releases of our parent stack that are suitable for > components and plugins that are making the leap to Java 1.6 and Maven > 3 as their base requirements. > > What do people think is the right approach in terms of what stays on > trunk and what goes on a branch, and whether to do anything > distinctive to the version numbers? > > >>> > >>> Finally, someone's stepping up for such a good change. Though, I think > >>> some important stuff needs to be considered first: > >>> > >>> 1. Announce 2.x EOL and give people at least 3 months to switch. > >> > >> > >> > >> Already done and site updated > > > > > > Just had a hard time to find this information on the (front) page. > > I think a mere: 2014-02-18 End of Life EoL notes, announce is not > enough. I > > would have expected something like this on the front page: > > > > Looking for Maven 2? > > // Either some text > > // or the link to the EoL announcement. > > > > > >>> 2. If you align plugins with a 3.0 baseline, I would bump at least a > >>> minor > >>> version, maybe even a major one. > >> > >> > >> > >> I think bumping a major version would be fair and proper... But we don't > >> have a formal policy yet, and a minor version bump might be valid too. > > > > > > Beside the general draft [1] we do already have two good policies. Even > one > > at Apache APR [2], and semver.org. > > > > Micahel > > > > [1] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > > [2] https://apr.apache.org/versioning.html#strategy > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: Release notes for 3.2.1 lost on the Maven homepage
I had a look at the Download page and the JDK requirements incorrectly states 1.5. It should be 1.6 for Maven 3.2.x. /Anders On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > I just published the site with the ref docs and the updated release notes. > I don't know how long it takes to sync but you can check anything in SVN. > I'll leave them there until the morning, if you want to make any changes > feel free. If there are no issues I'll send out the announcement in the > morning. > > On Feb 23, 2014, at 1:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > I haven't announced it yet because trying to make all the pertinent > changes to the site is tedious. Take a look at the end of the day. > > > > On Feb 23, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Michael Osipov > wrote: > > > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> did anyone already check > http://maven.apache.org/docs/3.2.1/release-notes.html? > >> > >> The link "See complete release notes for all versions" links to > http://maven.apache.org/ and is missing a period. Release notes not > available. > >> > >> http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.2.1/ is a 404. > >> > >> http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-all.html does not include 3.2.x, > neither does http://maven.apache.org/release-notes-3.x.html. > >> > >> http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi says: > >> > >> "Maven 3.1.1 > >> > >> This is a stable version 3.0.x of Maven for projects that can't upgrade > to Maven 3.1 yet." > >> > >> This is obviously, incorrect. > >> > >> AND > >> > >> "Windows 2000/XP" + "C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0_02", seriously? > >> > >> Who has a good overview over that content to fix it? > >> > >> Michael > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jason > > > > -- > > Jason van Zyl > > Founder, Apache Maven > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > > http://twitter.com/takari_io > > - > > > > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational > > and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. > > > > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Jason > > -- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > http://twitter.com/takari_io > - > > To do two things at once is to do neither. > > -- Publilius Syrus, Roman slave, first century B.C. > > > > > > > > > >
