As we had some issues with an earlier staged Maven version (was it 3.0.4?)
and releasing (something with nginx in front of nexus), it would be great
if we could verify that we don't release something with an similar issue.
So, anyone doing a release the coming days please use the staged 3.1.0!
/An
The problems I saw only seemed to be affected my projects where I'd updated to
use 3.0 of the compiler plugin, using the default version used by maven 3.1.0
I've not seen the problem.
The problem I was seeing was that Maven was downloading pretty much EVERY .pom
mentioned in the upstream metada
On 27/11/2012, at 10:34 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> I'm going to be working on the core for a few weeks. I am not convinced
>> putting the ITs with the core is workable. I've tried it with a few
>> scenarios and it's super confusing
Hi,
I'd like to release the archetype for maven plugin.
The goal is to have an archetype which generate project using new mojo
annotations (and a sample to run maven-invoker-plugin)
We fixed 2 issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MARCHETYPES/fixforversion/18708
Staging repository:
https://repo
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I'm going to be working on the core for a few weeks. I am not convinced
> putting the ITs with the core is workable. I've tried it with a few
> scenarios and it's super confusing to me at least.
>
+1
>
> If you're going to convert them,
I'm going to be working on the core for a few weeks. I am not convinced putting
the ITs with the core is workable. I've tried it with a few scenarios and it's
super confusing to me at least.
If you're going to convert them, can you please keep them as individual
repositories for now and I'd li
2012/11/26 Andreas Dangel :
> Hi,
>
> you might want to wait with the new PMD Plugin until end of this week. I
> plan to release PMD 5.0.1 this week, which brings a couple of bugfixes:
> https://sourceforge.net/p/pmd/bugs/milestone/PMD-5.0.1/
>
> Additionally, I verified that the following two issu
On 2012-11-26 20:18, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>> There is also
>> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15367
>> which went into Jenkins 1.492 that was released yesterday, that may or
>> may not be a factor in this depending who you talk to.
>
> Additionally, there is
> https://issues.jenk
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Robert Scholte, Olivier Lamy, Hervé BOUTEMY, Maria Odea
Ching-Mallete
+1 (non binding): Tamás Cservenák, Tony Chemit, Mirko Friedenhagen, Anders
Hammar
I will promote the artifacts to the central repo.
Robert
Op Fri, 23 Nov
Agree. Shit happens, we'll deal with it. For now let's just lock it down to one
machine. We can also just setup individual builds on the separate machines. No
big deal.
jvz
On 2012-11-26, at 11:18 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
>> There is also
>> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-
On the jenkins question, Why don't all the other Apache projects for
which I'm on the dev list suffer from this?
On the RM question, I don't think it's worth waiting. The core is the
thing we release least often. We've run a release or two on the
components we've already migrated, and whomever run
Kristian, can you ping me on irc tomorrow and maybe I can put some time
into sorting the issues out (from the Jenkins side)
On Monday, 26 November 2012, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> > There is also
> > https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15367
> > which went into Jenkins 1.492 that was re
> There is also
> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15367
> which went into Jenkins 1.492 that was released yesterday, that may or
> may not be a factor in this depending who you talk to.
Additionally, there is
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-6604 which was fixed in
remotin
Hi,
you might want to wait with the new PMD Plugin until end of this week. I
plan to release PMD 5.0.1 this week, which brings a couple of bugfixes:
https://sourceforge.net/p/pmd/bugs/milestone/PMD-5.0.1/
Additionally, I verified that the following two issues would be fixed
with 5.0.1, too:
On 2012-11-26 19:49, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
>
>> On 2012-11-26 15:59, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
>>> wrote:
>>>
The problem is the asf builds running too often, and sometimes far too
On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> On 2012-11-26 15:59, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is the asf builds running too often, and sometimes far too
>>> often and hence spamming the mailing lists subst
On 2012-11-26 15:59, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
> wrote:
>
>> The problem is the asf builds running too often, and sometimes far too
>> often and hence spamming the mailing lists substantially. Some of it
>> has been solved, but there are still a f
I agree with Daniel and Jason. It's hard enough to release core... or at
least it seems that way to somebody who hasn't tried to release it yet.
Let's keep with the least amount of work
On 26 November 2012 16:03, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> FWIW: I agree with Jason on this. It's already staged i
On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>> I just don't know if it's officially required. If I have to then I have no
>> choice. If it's not officially required I'll use the Nexus staging
>> repository.
>>
>
> Some other projects @asf do as it so I copie
FWIW: I agree with Jason on this. It's already staged in Nexus, there
really isn't a point (to me) to stage it yet someplace else. If the vote
fails, that would then mean multiple places to have to go to to drop things,
cleanup, etc… More steps means more things are likely to be forgotte
2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
> I just don't know if it's officially required. If I have to then I have no
> choice. If it's not officially required I'll use the Nexus staging repository.
>
Some other projects @asf do as it so I copied this procedure.
At the end you will need to do it for the distri
I just don't know if it's officially required. If I have to then I have no
choice. If it's not officially required I'll use the Nexus staging repository.
On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:49 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>
2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>>> What are you referring to specifically?
>
> If this is not an edict for releases I really do not see the point of
> manually making a bunch of svn repository and manually copying a
On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>> What are you referring to specifically?
> "
> The goal is to commit candidate release to svn tree
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven-3/$VERSION.
More to the point what is it that we're really tryi
On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
>> What are you referring to specifically?
If this is not an edict for releases I really do not see the point of manually
making a bunch of svn repository and manually copying a bunch of stuff around
when the stagin
2012/11/26 Daniel Kulp :
>
> OK. Just read the release notes for PMD 5.0:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/pmd/files/pmd/5.0.0/
>
> PMD 5 is definitely NOT compatible with much of the configuration and custom
> rulesets and such that are out there. Thus, this really is a gigantic
> update.
2012/11/26 Jason van Zyl :
> What are you referring to specifically?
"
The goal is to commit candidate release to svn tree
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven-3/$VERSION. Then
once the vote passed svn move to
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/maven-3/$VERSION.
"
>
> On
On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
> The problem is the asf builds running too often, and sometimes far too
> often and hence spamming the mailing lists substantially. Some of it
> has been solved, but there are still a few issues remaniing:
>
>
> As far as I can see ther
OK. Just read the release notes for PMD 5.0:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pmd/files/pmd/5.0.0/
PMD 5 is definitely NOT compatible with much of the configuration and custom
rulesets and such that are out there. Thus, this really is a gigantic update.
I would recommend canceling this and
I'm getting:
[WARNING] Failure executing PMD: Couldn't find the class Can't find resource
rulesets/basic.xml. Make sure the resource is a valid file or URL or is on the
CLASSPATH. Here's the current classpath:
/Users/dkulp/bin/apache-maven-3.0.4/boot/plexus-classworlds-2.4.jar
java.lang.Run
What was the issue specifically? Something you think will affect people
generally?
On Nov 26, 2012, at 2:43 AM, Mark Derricutt wrote:
> FYI this was with maven-compiler-plugin 3.0 - which Olivier mentioned may
> have some issues?
>
> On 26/11/2012, at 11:41 PM, Mark Derricutt wrote:
>
>> Is
What are you referring to specifically?
On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:24 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> There is a procedure described here
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html with a
> place for zip,tarball etc..
>
> Why not following that ?
>
>
> --
> Olivier
> Le 26 nov
2012/11/26 Mark Derricutt :
> FYI this was with maven-compiler-plugin 3.0 - which Olivier mentioned may
> have some issues?
Not issues but in some cases perf degradation (see
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCOMPILER-187 )
I will add a flag to be able to disable incremental stuff.
Some variants o
FYI this was with maven-compiler-plugin 3.0 - which Olivier mentioned may have
some issues?
On 26/11/2012, at 11:41 PM, Mark Derricutt wrote:
> Is it me or is 3.1.0 downloading WAY WAY more .pom files from my version
> ranges that earlier versions?
Is it me or is 3.1.0 downloading WAY WAY more .pom files from my version ranges
that earlier versions?
Also, my main core build just failed with:
va:jar:13.0 (compile), com.google.inject:guice:jar:3.0 (compile),
org.slf4j:slf4j-api:jar:1.5.8 (compile), net.sf.ehcache:ehcache:jar:1.6.2
(compil
I noticed when building one of our core work projects the following which I
don't think I've ever seen before:
[WARNING] Checksum validation failed, expected http://localhost:/repository/all/smx3/smx3.core/8.2.2/smx3.core-8.2.2.pom
Seems to do being it for my smx3.core artifact, but randomly
Hi,
We solved N issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11140&styleName=Html&version=18287
There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=11140&status=1
Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/con
The problem is the asf builds running too often, and sometimes far too
often and hence spamming the mailing lists substantially. Some of it
has been solved, but there are still a few issues remaniing:
As far as I can see there are two aspects of the issue:
1. A configuration error (or any kind o
There is a procedure described here
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html with a
place for zip,tarball etc..
Why not following that ?
--
Olivier
Le 26 nov. 2012 07:24, "Jason van Zyl" a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Here is a link to Jira with 30 issues resolved:
>
> https://j
The Apache Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the Maven
Dependency Plugin, version 2.6
The dependency plugin provides the capability to manipulate artifacts.
It can copy and/or unpack artifacts from local or remote repositories
to a specified location.
http://maven.apache.org/plugins
Kristian/Olivier,
What exactly is the issue with switching over the core to Git? I only know
vaguely what the reasoning is because I happened to wander into IRC one day. I
also see the Jenkins issue[1] referred to in the Infra issue[2] about the
conversion but it's not clear what's happening th
41 matches
Mail list logo
