On 12/08/2007, at 6:56 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Looks like a bad plexus snapshot on my end, since it's fine on the
zone too.
testRender
(org.apache.maven.doxia.siterenderer.DefaultSiteRendererTest)
Time elapsed: 0.275 sec <<< ERROR!
java.lang.NoSuchMethodError:
org.codehaus.plexus.c
Count me in for the australian timezone.
On 13/08/2007, at 5:19 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
I was chatting with Piotr Tabor and he's concerned that we don't
spend enough time looking at patches. I tried to clean many of them
out a couple months back but there are many good patches in ther
All looks good. My preference is to keep going with 2.1-SNAPSHOT as
the version (I've found in the past going backwards was found to be
confusing), but I'm not that worried either way.
I assume Jan's facade would supercede maven-downloader, so that
should be deprecated?
Cheers,
Brett
On
I'll merge it. All the Its passed, the problem is pretty clear as you
mentioned and the change is simple.
-Original Message-
From: William Ferguson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 7:00 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: WAGON-73
OK, we've been running for the l
There will be confusion no matter what we do and the current name is the
most specific, might as well leave it. Dropping back to 1.0.0 is good
since it's really a new thing. It will add to the group to help
distinguish that its new.
+1 to leaving the artifactId
+1 to the 1.0.0 version.
-Origin
>
> Only PMC Members decide if it is going to be an official Apache
> release, creating the release itself
> can be done by any committer.
>
It was my understanding that committers could do a release as long as
the vote passed the PMC. I did a few releases prior to being on the PMC,
and I'm fai
On 13/08/2007, at 8:21 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Only PMC Members decide if it is going to be an official Apache
release, creating the release itself
can be done by any committer.
That's news to me.
There's no reference to who can do it here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
Like
On 13 Aug 07, at 1:02 AM 13 Aug 07, John Casey wrote:
I think the move is a good idea, especially since it means formally
decoupling the release cycles. Just one question: why drop the
version? If this is a total rewrite of the code, then isn't a 3.0
more in order than going all the way ba
I think the move is a good idea, especially since it means formally
decoupling the release cycles. Just one question: why drop the
version? If this is a total rewrite of the code, then isn't a 3.0
more in order than going all the way back to 1.0? The behaviors and
specs for artifacts are st
OK, we've been running for the last week with the patch for
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/wagon/branches/WAGON-73
And everything has been performing as expected.
Many thanks Brian!
Any chance we can get the patch folded into the trunk now?
Or do I need to enter it into Maven Patch Day?
On 8/12/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 13 Aug 07, at 12:13 AM 13 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > From my perspective, I am growing more conscious of the growing divide
> > between Maven and NMaven and am trying to make sure that I do not
> > duplicate
> > something th
On 13 Aug 07, at 12:13 AM 13 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
From my perspective, I am growing more conscious of the growing divide
between Maven and NMaven and am trying to make sure that I do not
duplicate
something that already exists or vice versa. That is why I want to
bring
this proposa
On 12 Aug 07, at 11:45 PM 12 Aug 07, Jason Dillon wrote:
On Aug 12, 2007, at 11:47 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I have separated out maven-artifact into its own module here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven-artifact
Cool! Will this hopefully get a simplified API for handling
reso
On 12 Aug 07, at 11:44 PM 12 Aug 07, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 12 Aug 07, at 9:09 PM 12 Aug 07, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 8/12/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Has someone told you you're going to be doing a release? The only
folks who need to put their
The scope of the solution is starting to expand; so I want to hit it
point-by-point from my perspective. First, I don't implement the
ArtifactResolver interface. There are various reasons for this which I have
blogged about and sent on the NMaven list. A much more detailed list of
reasons is here:
On Aug 12, 2007, at 11:47 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I have separated out maven-artifact into its own module here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven-artifact
Cool! Will this hopefully get a simplified API for handling
resolution of transitive dependencies too?
I will attempt to
Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 12 Aug 07, at 9:09 PM 12 Aug 07, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>
>> On 8/12/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Has someone told you you're going to be doing a release? The only
>>> folks who need to put their KEYS in this file PMC members who are
>>> doing rele
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 12 Aug 07, at 8:15 PM 12 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
Okay, I have updated the proposal with more info concerning the issues
with
.NET support. Currently, NMaven handles its own resolver and installation
based on information from its net-dependencies.xml file. This i
On 12 Aug 07, at 9:09 PM 12 Aug 07, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 8/12/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Has someone told you you're going to be doing a release? The only
folks who need to put their KEYS in this file PMC members who are
doing releases.
Any committer can prepare the bits
Hi,
I was chatting with Piotr Tabor and he's concerned that we don't
spend enough time looking at patches. I tried to clean many of them
out a couple months back but there are many good patches in there so
in an attempt to keep the people happy who are giving us their spare
time myself, A
On 8/12/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has someone told you you're going to be doing a release? The only
> folks who need to put their KEYS in this file PMC members who are
> doing releases.
Any committer can prepare the bits for a release and call a vote, and
Deng was the release
Has someone told you you're going to be doing a release? The only
folks who need to put their KEYS in this file PMC members who are
doing releases.
Helps us keep track of who does releases, or who has done releases.
On 10 Aug 07, at 8:26 AM 10 Aug 07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: ochin
I have separated out maven-artifact into its own module here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/maven-artifact
I will attempt to use it in trunk mid week, and right now I have
change the groupId to org.apache.maven.artifact.
Do we need to change the name of the artifactId to prevent con
On 12 Aug 07, at 8:15 PM 12 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
Okay, I have updated the proposal with more info concerning the
issues with
.NET support. Currently, NMaven handles its own resolver and
installation
based on information from its net-dependencies.xml file. This is
internal
to NMaven
Okay, I have updated the proposal with more info concerning the issues with
.NET support. Currently, NMaven handles its own resolver and installation
based on information from its net-dependencies.xml file. This is internal
to NMaven as you suggest it should be for any plugin. The problem comes
up
On 12 Aug 07, at 8:35 AM 12 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 08/08/2007, at 4:23 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I vaguely remember having problems releasing 2.0.7 with changes in
the parent. I will try and do a dummy release of the branch to
test it out.
Pretty sure these were resolved - bu
On 12 Aug 07, at 5:53 AM 12 Aug 07, Jason Dillon wrote:
On Aug 11, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
In Maven-project, there's org.apache.maven.project.ModelUtils,
which has some
methods to merge plugin definitions.
Okay, thanks I will have a peek.
Just curious, what do you need
On 12 Aug 07, at 5:11 AM 12 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2007, at 5:07 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
Using the latest of everything doesn't correct the problem -
seems like there's still a bug.
OK, we need to track this down ASAP.
Cool, thanks for taking care o
On 12 Aug 07, at 12:25 AM 12 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
I just submitted a new proposal here:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/Extending+Pom+to+Include
+Artifact+Installation+Instructions
You may want to explain some of your .net specifics as with C++ we
operate decently with
29 matches
Mail list logo
