Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Brett Porter pisze: [X] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) I support Jason's Dillo and Arik's Kfir opinions. At Apache Cocoon we have been suffering far too much from Maven's unpredictability in general. Last versions of Maven (2.0.6+) plus more knowledge about best practises in Maven made our builds controllable and very stable. The only remaining part are plug-in versions, exactly. It's worth to say that many of our brilliant members were so dissatisfied with broken builds driven by Maven that nobody had idea what's wrong that they started to claim that Cocoon is dying because of Maven. Many times, it was caused by our misuse or misunderstanding of Maven's philosophy but it was a Maven that allowed us to fall into these pitfalls. We are more clever now and fortunately enough, we are pretty satisfied with Maven today even if we have a lot of crap in our poms due to numerous bugs in Maven. My opinion is that Maven's community should be also more clever and should not allow people to screw their builds. -- Grzegorz Kossakowski http://reflectingonthevicissitudes.wordpress.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Reading more responses, it seems like a lot of people want A so Maven can help people with their builds. In the long-run (post 2.1), I also like A, but we can't jump there overnight. Today I prefer B, but I am OK with A if we do the following: 1. Have a tag in the pom, which is also available on the command line, named unstable_build. Archetype should be modified to insert this tag and it should default to true (for now). 2. If unstable_build is true, we should throw a message at the beginning and end of the build that says Maven is running in UNSTABLE build mode. Go here http://maven.apache.org/FAQ/UnstableBuild to get rid of this message. and then we have a FAQ that talks about versioning things, how to lock things down, why its a good thing, etc. 3. If unstable_build is true and versions are unspecified, then Maven works like it does today. The tag unstable_build is specifically chosen to be somewhat offensive/negative and with immediately obvious meaning -- hopefully this is true for our international friends, too. No QE/QA group in the world would allow a self-declared unstable build pass their organization. But new users or expert users who don't want their versions locked down (yet) can still get into Maven and get things done without hassles. I appreciate the comments about helping people get their builds right etc and generally agree, but I don't think we can jump to this extreme overnight. So let's deprecate the idea of not specifying versions and then perhaps we can eliminate it (require all versions) in 2.2, 2.3, or 3.x. Wayne On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Oops, I just wrote something similar in the other vote thread. Agree entirely, but the enforcer is not the right place for it, perhaps a plugin-manager plugin or such. Andy On 2 Sep 2007, at 19:33, Arik Kfir wrote: Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non- enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Has anyone thought about enforcing the compiler-plugin source and target version also to be locked down? The default is also causing much grief. mvn enforcer:make-maven-stable could then call mvn enforcer:lock-plugins enforcer:lock-compiler With kind regards, Geoffrey De Smet Andrew Williams schreef: Oops, I just wrote something similar in the other vote thread. Agree entirely, but the enforcer is not the right place for it, perhaps a plugin-manager plugin or such. Andy On 2 Sep 2007, at 19:33, Arik Kfir wrote: Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non-enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
RE: Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Aren't the compiler versions defaulted to a value already? -Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoffrey De Smet Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 7:24 AM To: dev@maven.apache.org Subject: Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later Has anyone thought about enforcing the compiler-plugin source and target version also to be locked down? The default is also causing much grief. mvn enforcer:make-maven-stable could then call mvn enforcer:lock-plugins enforcer:lock-compiler With kind regards, Geoffrey De Smet Andrew Williams schreef: Oops, I just wrote something similar in the other vote thread. Agree entirely, but the enforcer is not the right place for it, perhaps a plugin-manager plugin or such. Andy On 2 Sep 2007, at 19:33, Arik Kfir wrote: Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non-enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Stephen Connolly wrote: B With the following proviso: I'd like to see main Maven releases more often, and have those main releases specify a suite of endorsed plugin versions for that Maven release. That way, if I want a stable reproducible build, I just continue to use the version of Maven that I built with. It will keep using the same versions of all the endorsed plugins unless I override them. If I want to bump a specific plugin, I just provide a version for that in my pom. If I want to bump them all, I just down load the latest Maven release and try building. From my (user) perspective, this approach sounds practicable and very easy to use and understand for Maven newbies. And, for the more advanced users, it's simple to override. - Arne -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-poll--Requiring-users-to-specify-plugin-versions-in-Maven-2.1-or-later-tf4366501s177.html#a12461810 Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
A I think this is *critical* to reduce build fragility which is currently affects many/most Maven 2 builds. IMO, making the version required, just like it is for dependencies is a bit of a burden, but will dramatically increase the build longevity of Maven 2 projects. (And actually, once the pom include/merge|plugin-pack thingy is sorted out, then the burden is going to drop off dramatically, since the Maven team can publish a plugin-pack pom with each Maven release with the know/tested/recommended versions of plugins, and the Mojo folks can do the same). --jason On Sep 1, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
[A]. IMO this is totally critical to generate auditably correct builds, which ought to be the default. I've got 3 or 4 maven-built projects, and it's already a bit of a nightmare - I really really don't want to be in the situation where downloading new releases of mvn 'magically' updates plugins, or packs of plugins in the background. There's plenty of things that could be done to stop the 'new user' experience being bad, such as adding default versions in the super-pom, adding interactive 'which version do you mean' questions for projects being updated and providing a mojo that updates all your POMs automatically; maybe even allowing commandline-specified invocations (like eclipse:eclipse) to default to the latest release. But a build tool that doesn't guarantee that the same inputs always produce the same ouputs on any given day without the need for 'special best practice plugins' to be used isn't a good place to be, IMO. On 02/09/07, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
[A] All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) With kind regards, Geoffrey De Smet Brett Porter schreef: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
On 3 Sep 07, at 8:25 AM 3 Sep 07, Jason Dillon wrote: So, again... me thinky... A nay B. I think ultimately with the enforcer method you A) when you are ready, and it's very easy to do. I've been using it in a few builds now for a couple weeks and it's a great way to enforce it at the team level while letting new projects wiggle around a bit. You need this flexibility when starting as people will not read the doco and when they pull out an archetype for the first time it should work. The plugin pack in here looks easy at first but when you need to change something it become onerous. You effectively get A) with the flip of a switch. --jason On Sep 1, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven jason at sonatype dot com -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
B Hervé Le dimanche 2 septembre 2007, Brett Porter a écrit : I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default behavior, which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical projects. If they don't specify versions they should however be nagged by a warning that it is bad practice. This combined with an easy way to turn on the enforcer (or something like it) to get A. This would satisfy everyone who cares about build reproducibility. Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
B Regards, Garvin LeClaire [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
On Sep 3, 2007, at 11:24 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote: As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default behavior, which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical projects. If they don't specify versions they should however be nagged by a warning that it is bad practice. Urg... IMO this is *not* something that I would consider *good* for beginners. This will lead down the path of unstable and fragile builds which can break mysteriously w/o and project source changes, often leaving new folks mystified, frustrated, and really kinda pissed off at Maven. And IMO, that is *not* the type of new user experience which Maven wants to breed, promote, recommend or really allow. The cost of putting in some version numbers, vs. new users confused and pissed off seems to be a good trade off to me. Pissed off user tend to spread the word and that is where FUD comes about after 2 pissed off users chat about how much Maven sucks because of blah and why its sucks even more because of foo... when really its sucks neither because of blah or foo, but because its kinda setup right now to let new users, who really don't know any better, than just want to use the tool and start learning about its greatness (which is in there believe me), shoot themselves in the foot with a 45 because they were unaware of the automatic firing mechanism when a new model of bullet is released. This combined with an easy way to turn on the enforcer (or something like it) to get A. This would satisfy everyone who cares about build reproducibility. If it was a huge task to implement the required version, then I'd say okay... and then litter the docs with the enforcer to show folks that they really *must* use that plugin to get repeatable and predictable builds for their projects. BUT, I really don't see that as the case at all. I really, really, really (well, really, really) think that Maven should help new users (and veterans alike) quickly and easily build powerful, stable, repeatable builds that can enjoy a long and fruitful life of successful builds unaffected by changes and evolution of components which they depend upon. Again, this seems painfully obvious to me. And, well heck if you really want to not deal with the sarcasmoh so painful burden/sarcasm of telling the build which version of build components your project needs to depend on, then I'm okay with making a cli flag, like --i-know-what-im-doing-forget-about-plugin-versions- imlazy or something to flip on the current 2.0's behavior to pick the latest version of a plugin when no version is given. But, IMO for the health of the project, for the longevity of users builds (and for my builds too damn it)... I really believe we must force the default behavior to require version's to be specified for all plugins which are used by project to build. * * * If it was up to me (which well, it ain't) I just make that call... and then rant heavily at users who disagree until they concede my point or go away to find a bucket of water to soak their head in. But hey, I've been wrong before... the universe could be aligning now and another celestial even of the jason of planet57 being wrong may actually occur. But then again my ego might pop before then, so eh... well... /me shuts up now --jason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
A Rationale: my expectation, and I suspect most developers' expectations, is that when I build my product with a tool and my source does not change and I do not explicitly install a new version of my tool, that my resulting binary does not change either. With dynamic downloads of plug-ins (i.e., dynamic tool installs over which I have little or no /obvious/ control), that expectation cannot be met without an explicit statement of the specific tools I'm using. My expectations could be satisfied by having the tool specify the explicit list of plug-ins (which is probably more B than A) which it will use, a release-approved set of plug-ins. In both implementations, the critical aspect is the same: the build is reproducible over all time. -Jan On 9/1/07, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
(A) -Lukas Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
A -- Olivier -Message d'origine- De : Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoyé : dimanche 2 septembre 2007 04:48 À : Maven Developers List Objet : [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ This e-mail, any attachments and the information contained therein (this message) are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you have received this message in error please send it back to the sender and delete it. Unauthorized publication, use, dissemination or disclosure of this message, either in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. ** Ce message électronique et tous les fichiers joints ainsi que les informations contenues dans ce message ( ci après le message ), sont confidentiels et destinés exclusivement à l'usage de la personne à laquelle ils sont adressés. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, merci de le renvoyer à son émetteur et de le détruire. Toutes diffusion, publication, totale ou partielle ou divulgation sous quelque forme que se soit non expressément autorisées de ce message, sont interdites. ** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Jason Dillon wrote: On Sep 3, 2007, at 11:24 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote: As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default behavior, which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical projects. If they don't specify versions they should however be nagged by a warning that it is bad practice. Urg... IMO this is *not* something that I would consider *good* for beginners. This will lead down the path of unstable and fragile builds which can break mysteriously w/o and project source changes, often leaving new folks mystified, frustrated, and really kinda pissed off at Maven. And IMO, that is *not* the type of new user experience which Maven wants to breed, promote, recommend or really allow. I fail to see how how warning users the it's bad practice to *not* specify version can be considered promoting or recommending. The cost of putting in some version numbers, vs. new users confused and pissed off seems to be a good trade off to me. Pissed off user tend to spread the word and that is where FUD comes about after 2 pissed off users chat about how much Maven sucks because of blah and why its sucks even more because of foo... when really its sucks neither because of blah or foo, but because its kinda setup right now to let new users, who really don't know any better, than just want to use the tool and start learning about its greatness (which is in there believe me), shoot themselves in the foot with a 45 because they were unaware of the automatic firing mechanism when a new model of bullet is released. I'd suggest that you spend a little time on [EMAIL PROTECTED] You'll find that there are a lot of people who don't care about reproducibility. I see this warning/enforcer as the first step towards requiring versions. But I don't believe we can require versions in 2.1. There are just too many builds out there that would suddenly fail. This combined with an easy way to turn on the enforcer (or something like it) to get A. This would satisfy everyone who cares about build reproducibility. If it was a huge task to implement the required version, then I'd say okay... and then litter the docs with the enforcer to show folks that they really *must* use that plugin to get repeatable and predictable builds for their projects. If you had read my post in the discussion thread you would know that I was talking about something so simple it wouldn't require any littering whatsoever. BUT, I really don't see that as the case at all. I really, really, really (well, really, really) think that Maven should help new users (and veterans alike) quickly and easily build powerful, stable, repeatable builds that can enjoy a long and fruitful life of successful builds unaffected by changes and evolution of components which they depend upon. Making all their builds fail when they upgrade to Maven 2.1 is helping them? People will just throw 2.1 out the window and stay with 2.0 and we're stuck with *no* control at all over version. Again, this seems painfully obvious to me. And, well heck if you really want to not deal with the sarcasmoh so painful burden/sarcasm of telling the build which version of build components your project needs to depend on, then I'm okay with making a cli flag, like --i-know-what-im-doing-forget-about-plugin-versions-imlazy or something to flip on the current 2.0's behavior to pick the latest version of a plugin when no version is given. As I said in the discussion thread, there should be a property that the user can set to say: I don't care about versions - stop nagging me. Helping the users add versions can be made with a plugin that adds the latest (or the recommended) versions for everything in your pom. But, IMO for the health of the project, for the longevity of users builds (and for my builds too damn it)... I really believe we must force the default behavior to require version's to be specified for all plugins which are used by project to build. I agree that this is the long term goal, but we should make this transition step by step. * * * If it was up to me (which well, it ain't) I just make that call... and then rant heavily at users who disagree until they concede my point or go away to find a bucket of water to soak their head in. But hey, I've been wrong before... the universe could be aligning now and another celestial even of the jason of planet57 being wrong may actually occur. But then again my ego might pop before then, so eh... well... /me shuts up now --jason -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
I should start by saying that I haven't followed the entire thread on this subject, so if something I say here has been beat to death elsewhere just write me off as a lurker and go on... I have started specifying versions for all lifecycle plugins in my company POM with the hopes that would be enough to lock all plugin versions. If you can make it so that I can specify something like org.apache.maven.pom:lifecycle:2.0.7 or com.mycompany:plugin-versions:1.1.6 (with all the proper XML around it, of course) as a dependency/mix-in/etc which would lock down all of the plugin versions, I am all in favor of (A). Part of the difficulty in this is getting all of the plugins to lock down their dependencies so that using version x.y.z of a plugin will always and forever more use the same specific version of each dependency. If something as simple as described above is not feasible, then I think we must go the route of (B) to avoid major user (and especially new user) headaches just trying to get a simple project started. Another possibility, although probably a major PITA, would be to allow but warn if versions are not specified if the project version is a snapshot. This would allow a user to start version x.y.z-SNAPSHOT of a project, comment out the version numbers for the plugins, and get the current versions downloaded and identified. When the user is ready to lock down the plugin versions, they just fill in the version numbers from the messages produced during the build. The biggest problem with this is identifying which plugins should produce a warning. One last idea: Since this is likely to involve a increment in the model version (I think I saw 4.1.0), how about adding a required model element with a syntax like parent which specifies the version list? If it can be inherited, it makes it easy to specify the value for entire project trees. By making it required (or producing a warning if not specified), you encourage users to make the specification. If each Maven release provides an example with the latest release versions of each plugin at the time the Maven release is created, then there would be very little editing required by the user to make a custom version to update certain plugins; the new user can get everything specified automatically with a very short POM so the amount of typing required just to get a project off the ground would be minimal. - Original Message - From: Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 10:48 PM Subject: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
[ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins B. The release plugin should lock version numbers down as part of the release process and then the build is repeatable. For development builds I am happy to either manually specify plugin values (to workaround defects) or use whatever is located in my local repository or occassionally run -cpu -U to pull down a newever version. There is nothing stopping someone who wants more formalism to lock their poms down themselves (maybe with the help of a tool) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
On 9/1/07, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Given my answer to the other poll, that I don't mind maintaining a big pluginManagement section in a corporate parent pom... I think I have to go with B here so that new users can do things like play with the quickstart archetype without being exposed to a hundred lines of plugin config. If that poll comes out in favor of plugin packs or mixins... then I'll happily take A here. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
On 9/3/07, Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A I think this is *critical* to reduce build fragility which is currently affects many/most Maven 2 builds. +1 for reducing build fragility, however we can do it IMO, making the version required, just like it is for dependencies is a bit of a burden, but will dramatically increase the build longevity of Maven 2 projects. +1 I don't claim to understand all of the ins and outs of how plugin dependencies work and what the realistic options are to cleanup the mess that indeterminacy has caused; but at least at apache, we have to have our builds reproducible - reliably, durably, from tags and released sources. Phil - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
A - I'm already doing it in a corporate parent POM which must have now approximatively 1000 lines. It's not perfect but It's the better solution to have a reproductive build. It's also a workaround because I proxy in only one repository releases and snapshots coming from everywhere because we have some slowness in the network between bangalore and paris thus it's a great gain of performance to send only one request to the repository server. Cheers, Arnaud On 04/09/07, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/1/07, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Given my answer to the other poll, that I don't mind maintaining a big pluginManagement section in a corporate parent pom... I think I have to go with B here so that new users can do things like play with the quickstart archetype without being exposed to a hundred lines of plugin config. If that poll comes out in favor of plugin packs or mixins... then I'll happily take A here. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .. Arnaud HERITIER .. OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com www.octo.com | blog.octo.com .. ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org www.apache.org | maven.apache.org ... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
B With the following proviso: I'd like to see main Maven releases more often, and have those main releases specify a suite of endorsed plugin versions for that Maven release. That way, if I want a stable reproducible build, I just continue to use the version of Maven that I built with. It will keep using the same versions of all the endorsed plugins unless I override them. If I want to bump a specific plugin, I just provide a version for that in my pom. If I want to bump them all, I just down load the latest Maven release and try building. -Stephen. Brett Porter wrote: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
B Raphaël 2007/9/2, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand). [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current discussion) [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins [ ] (C) No opinion [ ] (D) Undecided [ ] (E) Other (please specify) Thanks, Brett -- Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
[X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non-enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
On 2 Sep 07, at 11:33 AM 2 Sep 07, Arik Kfir wrote: Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins That's not the enforcer's job but yes a simple tool to grab the latest set of stable plugin. Place it in a POM of your choice where everything done is visible. This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins Exactly. or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non- enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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] Thanks, Jason -- Jason van Zyl Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven jason at sonatype dot com -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
I think this might be the most practical solution. Yes, perhaps the functionality belongs with some type of pom/release/build/CM topic'd plugin, but that is a secondary issue! Tools like the archetypes can create them/have them created in the pom too, e.g. if genAllDeps=true. -Original Message- From: Arik Kfir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 1:34 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non-enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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]
Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
Same here. Thanks, Stéphane On 9/2/07, Arik Kfir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of: mvn enforcer:lock-plugins This command will find the most appropriate version of relevant plugins and modify my POM(s) to explicitly specify them. Later on, I can either manually modify my POM when I want to upgrade a plugin, or run another command, e.g: mvn enforcer:update-all-plugins or: mvn enforcer:update-plugin -DgroupId=org.apache.maven.plugins-DartifactId=maven-jar-plugin -Dversion=latest/2.9.9.9 Current behavior should remain, if only not to upset the many non-enterprise users which use Maven more lightly. HTH, Arik. On 9/2/07, Dan Tran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B Totally agree with Wayne here. -D On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such as having the repository manager handle the available plugins I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such, I think the current behavior is best. Once they get using Maven more seriously (and in corporate environments that know what they're doing), I think adding the Enforcer configuration and locking versions down will come naturally. But *requiring* it seems excessive -- unless we're doing that ourselves somewhere, with plugin packs or similar, then I feel better about it. Wayne - 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] -- Large Systems Suck: This rule is 100% transitive. If you build one, you suck -- S.Yegge - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
