On 23-Apr-09, at 11:19 PM, Daniel Le Berre wrote:
Jason,
The summary is perfectly correct.
I would add that the author mentions too that your are friends, and
the way the text is written is not offensive.
Good thing you translated. From the title and the Google translated
text I read it
Thanks, Daniel. I kind of felt I was missing a dimension there.
Christian.
On 24-Apr-09, at 02:19 , Daniel Le Berre wrote:
Jason,
The summary is perfectly correct.
I would add that the author mentions too that your are friends, and
the way the text is written is not offensive.
(The autho
Jason,
The summary is perfectly correct.
I would add that the author mentions too that your are friends, and
the way the text is written is not offensive.
(The author clearly does not agree with current maven development
process, he would like it be more community driven,
but it looks like
Can't access these since Nexus is not responding because SVN is down.
My vote is on the ones in SVN, I'm going to trust they are the same.
+1
On 21/04/2009, at 1:05 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
Time to release the updated parent poms:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/apache-stagin
2009/4/24 Brian Fox
>
>
> Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other. This
>> hierarchy is an orga one.
>> If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
>> master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet al
Nicolas, I would like if you would provide your translation if you
want to respond. I'm not in any particular rush so take your time, but
you cannot post something like that and not expect me to respond.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:59 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
FWIW, here might have been a good place to di
On 23-Apr-09, at 7:50 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl
wrote:
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there
was a
great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved
to be a
decent system and now lots of projects
On 23-Apr-09, at 6:17 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale
switch today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT
Actually this will have no effect. The default for passphrase in the
plugin is...
|${gpg.passphrase}
|So no votes on this release?
On 4/20/2009 11:12 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Honestly, I think the lines:
${gpg.passphrase}
need to be taken out of the
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
> great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to be a
> decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
>
> I'm not particularly intereste
Issue Subscription
Filter: Design & Best Practices (28 issues)
Subscriber: mavendevlist
Key Summary
MNG-2184Possible problem with @aggregator and forked lifecycles
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2184
MNG-612 implement conflict resolution techniques
On 24/04/2009, at 12:01 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
On 4/23/2009 9:57 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 24/04/2009, at 9:55 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
I agree, if we call it 2.2 because it moves to jdk 1.5 and we fix
the other stuff, great. But lets keep the scope very small and
limited so we can get the
On 4/23/2009 9:57 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 24/04/2009, at 9:55 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
I agree, if we call it 2.2 because it moves to jdk 1.5 and we fix the
other stuff, great. But lets keep the scope very small and limited so
we can get the regressions in 2.1.0 out quickly.
I don't think
On 24/04/2009, at 9:55 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
I agree, if we call it 2.2 because it moves to jdk 1.5 and we fix
the other stuff, great. But lets keep the scope very small and
limited so we can get the regressions in 2.1.0 out quickly.
I don't think there's any harm in that. Version numbers a
On 23-Apr-09, at 5:33 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care
one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside
of the ASF
unless it would get the "blessing" from infrastructure a
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale switch
today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT but I do believe
that I have a better chance of
2) On a more serious note: this is EXACTLY the issue. Jason is no more
special than I am or anyone else on the Maven PMC. That is why there is a
centralized storage for the repo. Anyone on the PMC (actually, any
committer) MUST have access to entire repo for the project and be able to do
On Thu April 23 2009 5:46:50 pm Mark Struberg wrote:
> technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other.
> This hierarchy is an orga one.
>
> If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
> master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet al
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside of the ASF
unless it would get the "blessing" from infrastructure and/or the board. If
you want to invest some time/
I have two concerns:
1. Is GIT firewall friendly? At work I could never get to the CVS
repository because my employer's firewall pretty much only allows http
traffic. GIT would need to support that.
2. Is this OK with infra? Last I checked all Apache software had to be
under subversion.
No
FWIW, here might have been a good place to discuss concerns to begin
with, instead of on a blog.
Brian Fox wrote:
Isn't Nicolas around, maybe he'd like to offer a translation?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Thanks if that seems like a reasonable translation I will respond.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:00 PM, Ch
If he likes, I'll wait for him.
I was hoping someone like Vincent Massol, who is equally proficient in
French and English, would translate.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:54 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
Isn't Nicolas around, maybe he'd like to offer a translation?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Thanks if that seems li
First, I greatly appreciate you taking the time to look into this.
I've been so busy working on another project that as much as I have
intended to debug this, I just haven't had a chance.
If the problem is as you say then I'm not sure it should be fixed. But
the issue I heard reported was t
I agree, if we call it 2.2 because it moves to jdk 1.5 and we fix the
other stuff, great. But lets keep the scope very small and limited so we
can get the regressions in 2.1.0 out quickly. I'm afraid that relabeling
it 2.2 would mean a pile on the bandwagon effect occurs and we'd be
stuck churn
Get a second opinion, but it's more or less the gist.
Christian
On Apr 23, 2009, at 7:52 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Thanks if that seems like a reasonable translation I will respond.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:00 PM, Christian Edward Gruber wrote:
My french isn't perfect, but the article basically...
Isn't Nicolas around, maybe he'd like to offer a translation?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Thanks if that seems like a reasonable translation I will respond.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:00 PM, Christian Edward Gruber wrote:
My french isn't perfect, but the article basically...
...argues against you (Jason)
Thanks if that seems like a reasonable translation I will respond.
On 23-Apr-09, at 4:00 PM, Christian Edward Gruber wrote:
My french isn't perfect, but the article basically...
...argues against you (Jason) personally having the habit of
imposing dramatic changes by presenting them as a
John Casey wrote:
1. leave MNG-4140 unfixed
I admire your efforts on the core and my intention was surely not to
hinder the progress you or anybody else makes, only to properly label it.
2. drag in something like jdom +jaxen +saxpath to do xpath
search/replacement for MNG-4140
3. attempt t
Agreed 100%, it applies across the board. We have two hurdles, one easy,
one not so easy:
1. fix the release plugin / scm provider.
2. convince infra to host a rw git repo.
Tim O'Brien wrote:
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it, contribu
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it, contribute it back without having to jump through the JIRA
+ patch + "convince a committer to pay attention" hoop. The main
difference here is that Git makes it really easy to merge in changes and
select
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other.
This hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet all contributors
will try to get th
Damn... that's nicholas? Oh, I understand the GWT comment now. I
remember that discussion.
Christian.
On Apr 23, 2009, at 6:46 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Could someone who speaks French please translate this for me before
I respond:
http://blog.loof.fr/
I'm not a native French speaker so
My french isn't perfect, but the article basically...
...argues against you (Jason) personally having the habit of imposing
dramatic changes by presenting them as a fait-acomplis.
There's a bit of a bill of rights: We have the right to choose
archiva or nexus (which he labels as Jason &
Could someone who speaks French please translate this for me before I
respond:
http://blog.loof.fr/
I'm not a native French speaker so I won't speculate, but if someone
would translate I would like to respond.
Thanks,
Jason
--
Jason
Hi Vincent!
> http://git.apache.org/
> Using GIT in write mode sounds like a normal step.
These are only git mirrors of our SVN and not intended to push to them but to
use dcommit.
So this is cool for quickly download/going offline with the whole project
history but not enough for real collabo
yesA default-profil in my activeProfiles
In this profil I have 2 repositories :
- one for releases with the id central
- one for snashots with the id snapshot
Each repository is an archiva / nexus group
Arnaud
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:56 PM, John Casey wrote:
> was the settings-injected rep
was the settings-injected repository in a profile that was marked in
?
Just trying to get an idea how to replicate.
Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks to try to fix this.
I have this issue but in my case I don't define any repository in my
projects. I override the central definition i
I added that today, after Benjamin mentioned it.
Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4143Actually it's scheduled for 2.1.1
Arnaud
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
John Casey wrote:
Since we've already decided that 2.1
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
John Casey wrote:
I have no objection to move to 1.5, but we can't do it for a point release.
The alternatives to moving to 1.5 for 2.1.1 are:
1. leave MNG-4140 unfixed
2. drag in something like jdom +jaxen +saxpath to do xpath
search/repl
Hi,
GIT is already proposed by infrastructure in read only mode
http://git.apache.org/
Using GIT in write mode sounds like a normal step.
Does Maven SCM support *fully* GIT? I think specially for some plugins
like the release plugin
Cheers,
Vincent
2009/4/23 Jason van Zyl :
> Hi,
>
> Maven wa
technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other.
This hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet all contributors
will try to get their changes being pulled
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
> +1 for moving to git.
>
> Jukka already mirrors a lot of projets on GitHub and there is already a
> git.apache.org domain too (not sure where this leads too).
>
> Jason is already convinced, but for all other sceptics:
> Basically the loca
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4143Actually it's scheduled for 2.1.1
Arnaud
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> > John Casey wrote:
> >
> >> Since we've already decided that 2.1.0 would be moving to Java 1.5 I
> >> can't see the use in hangi
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> John Casey wrote:
>
>> Since we've already decided that 2.1.0 would be moving to Java 1.5 I
>> can't see the use in hanging onto the 1.4 requirement
>
> Let me clarify that I'm fine with moving to Java 1.5 (hurray). My
> concern was that this change is made between 2.1.
+0I never used GIT but I'm hearing a lot of good things about it and it is
already used by many opensources projects.
I would prefer to not have another drama with infra team if possible.
Perhaps we could help them to set it up if necessary ?
If you have tools for GIT on MacOS, do not hesitate to s
Hi John,
Thanks to try to fix this.
I have this issue but in my case I don't define any repository in my
projects. I override the central definition in my user's settings to use our
corporate repo. This method always works to build projects except when I'm
using imports : Maven tries to downloa
On the release plugin I believe John Smart has that working. And
having our release toolchain tested before switching is a completely
reasonable criterion.
That's my primary concern, that the tools support it, or we experiment
first to find out _how_ they work. It seems like from the maven
On 23-Apr-09, at 11:13 AM, John Casey wrote:
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the
question of what lives at the ASF if not the project source code.
Having said that, I understand the reasons for using an external
hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a little
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the question of
what lives at the ASF if not the project source code. Having said that,
I understand the reasons for using an external hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a little bit for utility projects and to
check out other o
I would like to start it with Maven 3.x only because I would be
willing to put in the effort to maintain it, find resources to
maintain it and support users.
I can't speak for everyone, but if we wanted to move everything to GIT
I would be in favor of that.
I think we basically decide whe
Hi,
I've been looking into MNG-3553 and the relevant code, and I'm starting
to believe that we cannot solve the problem discussed in the issue
without breaking other functionality.
The basic problem stated in the issue is:
Given:
project A
- packaging == 'pom'
- has dependencies on X,Y,Z
+1 for moving to git.
Jukka already mirrors a lot of projets on GitHub and there is already a
git.apache.org domain too (not sure where this leads too).
Jason is already convinced, but for all other sceptics:
Basically the location of the repo is just wurscht! It doesn't make any
difference, s
I'm fine with moving to Git. When you say it will start with Maven 3.x, what
does that include? Will all the trunks switch over or just components/trunk to
start with?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
great deal of concern/no
Excellent. I do not have a long history with Git but from the projects I
used I'm always annoyed when I have to the projects I develop using SVN. So,
if my vote counts anyway I'm +1. We started using it for OI4J and everyone
getting accustom is loving it. Soon, I hope, all OPS4J projects will be on
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was
a great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to
be a decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
I'm not particularly interested in mandating everything in Maven to
use GIT but I w
Sorry posted to the wrong list...
--
SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893
Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029
Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579
52146 Würselen http://www.soebes.de
Hi there,
I have a large multi module project which is working well.
Now i'm trying to enhance this with a things which is in relationship
with the database...
Ok i decided to take a look at the sql-maven-plugin to execute some SQL
statements before an integration test is run (simply delete t
57 matches
Mail list logo
