On 11/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11 Sep 07, at 6:58 AM 11 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
> > Good stuff. I did try maven-artifact 3.0-SNAPSHOT in 2.0.x and it
> > appeared to work after lots of dependency tweaking - see my previous
> > comments in this thread. I can commit
On 11 Sep 07, at 6:58 AM 11 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 10/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I tried out your changes in 2.1 and it seems to work just fine.
Sweet!
Now if this works in 2.0.x and we decide we can go that path that
will be even sweeter.
Have you tried the m
On 10/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tried out your changes in 2.1 and it seems to work just fine. Sweet!
>
> Now if this works in 2.0.x and we decide we can go that path that
> will be even sweeter.
>
> Have you tried the maven-artifact trunk in 2.0.x?
>
> I haven't tried it
On 10 Sep 07, at 2:39 AM 10 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 07/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark, can you merge your changes into the trunk of maven-artifact?
I'm willing to try them out with 2.1.x.
Done - merged maven-artifact MNG-612 branch into trunk. Note the
other MN
On 07/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark, can you merge your changes into the trunk of maven-artifact?
> I'm willing to try them out with 2.1.x.
Done - merged maven-artifact MNG-612 branch into trunk. Note the
other MNG-612 branches for 2.0.x and 2.1.x are still outstanding.
Mark, can you merge your changes into the trunk of maven-artifact?
I'm willing to try them out with 2.1.x.
If we can work in tandem there to validate and test that would be
great. Thanks for taking the time to test 2.0.x. I really, really
hope we can get this to work as it means that people
On 7 Sep 07, at 6:39 AM 7 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 07/09/2007, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I started trying to get 2.0.x to use maven-artifact 3.0-SNAPSHOT. It
doesn't seem too bad - no compilation problems - currently just a
linking issue to resolve before the IT tests should
On 07/09/2007, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I started trying to get 2.0.x to use maven-artifact 3.0-SNAPSHOT. It
> doesn't seem too bad - no compilation problems - currently just a
> linking issue to resolve before the IT tests should hopefully pass.
The linking issue was due to maven
On 04/09/2007, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4 Sep 07, at 8:37 AM 4 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
> > I haven't had time to test it out in 2.1.x, although that FIXME needs
> > fixing first as detailed in the issue. When are you thinking of
> > releasing maven-artifact? Could be worth
On 9/3/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3 Sep 07, at 4:29 PM 3 Sep 07, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> >
> > On 04/09/2007, at 5:49 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
> >> merged into the decoupled version
> >
On 4 Sep 07, at 8:37 AM 4 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 04/09/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Indeed, when I wake up I'll take a look. Tomorrow evening I'll try to
integrate it into the daily build I'm doing for 2.1.x and see how
that goes.
Okay, I've branched maven-artifact and
On 04/09/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Indeed, when I wake up I'll take a look. Tomorrow evening I'll try to
> integrate it into the daily build I'm doing for 2.1.x and see how
> that goes.
Okay, I've branched maven-artifact and 2.1.x for MNG-612 and merged in
the changes from the
On 4 Sep 07, at 1:52 AM 4 Sep 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
Hi Jason,
I'll try to find some time this afternoon to have a go at merging my
branch into maven-artifact. It'd be good to get the code in before
the branch gets stale.
Indeed, when I wake up I'll take a look. Tomorrow evening I'll try t
Hi Jason,
I'll try to find some time this afternoon to have a go at merging my
branch into maven-artifact. It'd be good to get the code in before
the branch gets stale.
Cheers,
Mark
On 03/09/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on
riginal Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 8:38 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Lining up maven-artifact for a release
On 3 Sep 07, at 5:30 PM 3 Sep 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> I can move in the dependency-plugin filters once
llect them?
-Original Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 3:49 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Lining up maven-artifact for a release
Hi,
We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
merged into the deco
Developers List
Subject: Lining up maven-artifact for a release
Hi,
We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
merged into the decoupled version and we need to collect all the
filters that are floating around all over the place. I think the
filters can be in a separate
On 3 Sep 07, at 4:29 PM 3 Sep 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 04/09/2007, at 5:49 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
merged into the decoupled version
This should hopefully already be the case,
I don't believe Mark has done it yet
On 04/09/2007, at 5:49 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
merged into the decoupled version
This should hopefully already be the case, I try and keep an eye on
merges and flag stuff that isn't going trunk first. Probably a good
Hi,
We need to collect all outstanding fixes done on the 2.0.x branch
merged into the decoupled version and we need to collect all the
filters that are floating around all over the place. I think the
filters can be in a separate tree and we can decide what we want to
shade in by default b
20 matches
Mail list logo
