Hi,
I notice that we are using in the module archiva-jetty the
appassembler-maven-plugin v 1.0-SNAPSHOT from mojo and we didn't add the
snapshots repository of mojos in the pom. Is it wanted ?
--
..
Arnaud HERITIER
Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Hi,
I notice that we are using in the module archiva-jetty the
appassembler-maven-plugin v 1.0-SNAPSHOT from mojo and we didn't add the
snapshots repository of mojos in the pom. Is it wanted ?
I had only partial luck adding the codehaus snapshot repository as a
On 07/03/2008, at 5:33 AM, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Hi,
I notice that we are using in the module archiva-jetty the
appassembler-maven-plugin v 1.0-SNAPSHOT from mojo and we didn't
add the
snapshots repository of mojos in the pom. Is it wanted ?
I had only partial
Don't forget to merge to trunk :)
On 07/03/2008, at 4:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: joakime
Date: Thu Mar 6 09:40:26 2008
New Revision: 634361
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=634361view=rev
Log:
[MRM-731] variable in url pom are not replaced.
* Added test case outlined in
I think it is possible but I prefer to ask the advice of the team.
The ASL authorize a lot of things if you don't remove copyrights.
Arnaud
-- Forwarded message --
From: Amitkumar Abhimanyu Inkar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Subject: Need Permission
To:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:13 PM, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't quite understand what you mean. You're saying that if the
environment you run your tests in uses those variables, and we run
integration tests that fork Maven, they aren't passed on by default?
yes, exactly.
I think this fix should go onto the 1.0.x branch for the point
release, and it's probably good to keep the merge separate :)
On 06/03/2008, at 7:39 PM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Ooops, forgot I switched my SVN working copy to the springy branch...
As we are now ready to merge with trunk, does
Hi Amitkumar,
Your rights are spelled out in this license: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
(you should take a particular look at point 4 about redistribution).
While I can't give you comprehensive permission or advice specific to
your situation, I think you'll find that you can
Thanks a lot it's a lot clearer !
Cheers
Arnaud
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Maria Odea Ching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Arnaud,
You can only activate one of them (if the # of days old is 0, then purge
by # of days old; otherwise, purge by retention count). However, the purge
by # of
Amitkumar,
It might be a good idea if you could check whether your organization
maintains list of generally approved licenses (like mine does).
If this is the case, because ASF license isn't as strict as many other you
generally wont have problems for as long as (as Arnaud said) you keep the
Yes, I suppose that we are few to use those properties (I never used them
before yesterday) but I agree it should be transparent for plugins
developments and integration tests. I'll try to find a fix in
maven-plugin-testing-tools.
Arnaud
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL
Right, I'll report this in 1.0.x
2008/3/6, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think this fix should go onto the 1.0.x branch for the point
release, and it's probably good to keep the merge separate :)
On 06/03/2008, at 7:39 PM, nicolas de loof wrote:
Ooops, forgot I switched my SVN
Hi,
The Maven Plugin Tools projects are ready to be released. It includes
the following sub-projects:
* maven-plugin-plugin-2.4
* maven-plugin-tools-beanshell-2.2
* maven-plugin-testing-harness-1.2
* maven-plugin-tools-java-2.2
* maven-plugin-tools-2.2
* maven-plugin-tools-javadoc-1.0
*
On 3/6/08, Vincent Siveton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
The Maven Plugin Tools projects are ready to be released. It includes
the following sub-projects:
* maven-plugin-plugin-2.4
I'm worry it might be too late but..
Is there a chance to change image for marking 'non reports' goals
to
* maven-plugin-tools-api-2.2
According to JIRA, the maven-plugin-tools-api-2.2 was released 2006-12-29:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MPLUGIN/component/13118?selected=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project:component-changelog-panel
Cleaning up JIRA to get in sync with the POMs and the
Hi,
When preparing the Maven Plugin tools staging sites, I was unable to
deploy them because my station username is not the same than on
Apache. The pb comes from the following definition:
pluginManagement
plugin
artifactIdmaven-site-plugin/artifactId
Shouldn't your server settings supersede the station name?
-Original Message-
From: Vincent Siveton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:04 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Stage documentation
Hi,
When preparing the Maven Plugin tools staging sites, I was
Thanks Brett.
Vincent
2008/3/6, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 07/03/2008, at 3:29 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
* maven-plugin-tools-api-2.2
According to JIRA, the maven-plugin-tools-api-2.2 was released
2006-12-29:
Thanks Benjamin. I will call a new vote soon.
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/3/6, Benjamin Bentmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The Maven Plugin Tools projects are ready to be released.
-1, due to the issues I just filled in, especially MPLUGIN-89.
I apologize for checking things so late but it's mostly
Just to understand - does that mean you're going to re-align the
versions and leave the JIRA project as one?
(maybe the old versions in JIRA could signify which version of the
plugin and which of the tools like we did with surefire until the
versions were aligned)
Thanks,
Brett
On
Hi,
Thanks for review Jason
2008/3/4, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You have the loaded order, clearly specify the precedence.
Your code also is highly Maven specific but really you're just
Yep it's the goal here : providing a common component for all maven
plugins to interpolate List of
I think this is partially my fault. When Vincent bought up the idea of
aligning the groupIds within the plugin tolls, I gave a few reasons for
*not* doing that. So Vincent reverted that commit.
However, I think that also reverted the aligning of versions (to
2.4-SNAPSHOT) in pom files that
Brian, do you use some kind of auto-indent feature of your IDE? This
commit changed indentation of the pom file from the standard 2 spaced
that we use in Maven to 4 spaces.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: brianf
Date: Wed Mar 5 18:19:25 2008
New Revision: 634121
URL:
Hi Dennis,
2008/3/6, Dennis Lundberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think this is partially my fault. When Vincent bought up the idea of
aligning the groupIds within the plugin tolls, I gave a few reasons for
*not* doing that. So Vincent reverted that commit.
You were the only one to answer and you
Hi,
2008/3/6, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Just to understand - does that mean you're going to re-align the
versions and leave the JIRA project as one?
Nope. I proposed to create a new jira project for plugin tools (see MPA-107).
MPLUGIN will be for the Maven plugin.
Cheers,
Vincent
Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi,
2008/3/6, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Just to understand - does that mean you're going to re-align the
versions and leave the JIRA project as one?
Nope. I proposed to create a new jira project for plugin tools (see MPA-107).
MPLUGIN will be for the Maven
2008/3/6, Dennis Lundberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi,
2008/3/6, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Just to understand - does that mean you're going to re-align the
versions and leave the JIRA project as one?
Nope. I proposed to create a new jira project for
Will MPLUGIN and plugin tools have different release cycles?
Well, they already had: There is maven-plugin-plugin 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 in
central but only maven-plugin-tools-api/maven-plugin-tools-java 2.1.
Benjamin
-
To
I must have missed the original discussion about bringing them into
lockstep releases. Why do we think this is a good idea?
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Bentmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 6:31 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Vote] Release
On 07/03/2008, at 10:34 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I must have missed the original discussion about bringing them into
lockstep releases. Why do we think this is a good idea?
This would be where you voted for it:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/200709.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think that bringing them together under a group is ok, but I don't
think they should be versioned together. The tools are mostly
independent and updating one shouldn't mean it has to wait for bugs in
the other before being released. That's the opposite of agile...
-Original Message-
I was young and dumb and needed the money...
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 7:03 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Vote] Release Maven Plugin Tools projects
On 07/03/2008, at 10:34 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I must
Looking closer, we left the maven-plugin-testing-tools and
maven-test-tools in shared but the testing-harness got moved. I think
for now we should move the testing-harness back out of the tools and
then create a new plugin-testing structure. There's not a good reason to
mix runtime plugin tools
+1
On 07/03/2008, at 11:54 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
Looking closer, we left the maven-plugin-testing-tools and
maven-test-tools in shared but the testing-harness got moved. I think
for now we should move the testing-harness back out of the tools and
then create a new plugin-testing structure.
Issue Subscription
Filter: Design Best Practices (29 issues)
Subscriber: mavendevlist
Key Summary
MNG-2184Possible problem with @aggregator and forked lifecycles
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2184
MNG-3313NetBeans projects, more than ant project, more than
35 matches
Mail list logo
