: Thursday, December 18, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Ralph Goers
ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 11:31 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
And I've said multiple times that that isn't an adequate
On Dec 18, 2008, at 6:17 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I mentioned an idea in my review that seems to have been overlooked. I
think a regular .pom in the repository shouldn't be able to be used
as a
mixin. We should keep inheritance and mixins separate. The way I
would
do it is with a new
On 18-Dec-08, at 1:35 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
OK - I'm looking forward to seeing this. I understand the
programmatic aspect in the use case you describe with the IDE, but
not with something like the release capability. IIUC this would
allow our organization to create a standard way of
I think mixins are important, but I think in the short term trying to
focus on bring the spec up to what is known to be the behavior right
now is the focus. Once all those tests are done and the spec is
comprehensive with an appendix, has example, and where tests refer to
sections in the
:57 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Ralph Goers
ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 11:31 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
And I've said multiple times that that isn't an adequate
definition.
Jason's post
It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it? I think
it's just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
--Brian (mobile)
On Dec 18, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
2008/12/18 Brian Fox bri...@reply.infinity.nu
filtering or processing of it? I think it's just better to keep processing
of the Nixon separate.
--Brian (mobile)
I don't know that you'll ever get to process the Nixon... the best you can
do is get him to do is resign, but his successor will
The Nixon is not crooked, it doesn't need processing.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/18 Brian Fox bri...@reply.infinity.nu
filtering or processing of it? I think it's just better to keep
processing
of the Nixon separate.
On Dec 18, 2008, at 8:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 18-Dec-08, at 1:35 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
OK - I'm looking forward to seeing this. I understand the
programmatic aspect in the use case you describe with the IDE, but
not with something like the release capability. IIUC this would
On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info
that would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it?
I think it's just better to keep processing of the Nixon separate.
Yes, I agree (except with the Nixon
Gotta love Iphone autocorrect ;-)
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 1:09 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Mixins (was Re: POM construction specification)
2008/12/18 Brian Fox bri
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
2008/12/18 Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
would be needed to deploy... Or filtering or processing of it? I think
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
Sure, why not? We can just call mavenized mixins, Nixons. Now I just need a
big pen to start blacking out sections of the spec.
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:02 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
No chance.
2008/12/18 Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
It's not just about ignorig the ids. What about the distmgt info that
would
LOL
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:07 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
Sure, why not? We can just call mavenized mixins, Nixons. Now I just
need a
big pen to start
2008/12/18 Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com
On 18-Dec-08, at 3:02 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Actually, I'm liking the Nixon name for these mixins
No chance.
So you're saying that chance is not a factor hmm sounds like a done deal
so!
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
Mine below.
OK. As I read 2.2 it basically only says the first definition wins. 2.1
talks about a collection of models, but it doesn't say anything about
dependency resolution, either directly or in its references
this in the morning and didn't finish yet so sending what I
have.
-Original Message-
From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:59 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl
On 18/12/2008, at 1:51 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
Comments below:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Brett Porter br...@apache.org
wrote:
I fixed some typos - is it ok to regenerate the PDF? (mine comes out
slightly different on the Mac but it's all there AFAICT).
Just to add to what Brian
On Dec 17, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
I guess I really have no clue what functionality a mixin is
supposed to
provide or how it would be retrieved without a version or groupid.
Is it
being suggested they would be stored in the repo without that? I'd
need a
lot of
On 18-Dec-08, at 12:47 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
I guess I really have no clue what functionality a mixin is
supposed to
provide or how it would be retrieved without a version or groupid.
Is it
being suggested they would be stored in the
OK - I'm looking forward to seeing this. I understand the programmatic
aspect in the use case you describe with the IDE, but not with
something like the release capability. IIUC this would allow our
organization to create a standard way of doing something and then
somehow make it available
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
I guess I really have no clue what functionality a mixin is supposed to
provide or how it would be retrieved without a version or groupid. Is it
being suggested
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
OK - I'm looking forward to seeing this. I understand the programmatic
aspect in the use case you describe with the IDE, but not with something
like the release capability. IIUC this would allow our organization to
On Dec 17, 2008, at 10:57 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
I guess I really have no clue what functionality a mixin is
supposed to
provide or how it would be
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 10:57 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
I guess I really have no
On Dec 17, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
OK - I'm looking forward to seeing this. I understand the
programmatic
aspect in the use case you describe with the IDE, but not with
something
like the
On Dec 17, 2008, at 11:31 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
And I've said multiple times that that isn't an adequate definition.
Jason's post provided a better clue but still doesn't define it.
Your
definition is about like me telling you that I am heading a JCP
committee to
define a new Java
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2008, at 11:31 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
And I've said multiple times that that isn't an adequate definition.
Jason's post provided a better clue but still doesn't define it. Your
definition is about
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because
I know that you want to make some changes for not requiring the
version in the parent element.
You should have warned me to have a glass of wine before attempting to
List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because
I know that you want to make some changes for not requiring the
version in the parent element.
You should have warned me
: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:59 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because
I know that you
-
From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:59 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because
I know
Comments in line
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because I
know that you want to make some changes for not requiring the version in
On 16-Dec-08, at 3:58 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph
because I know that you want to make some changes for not requiring
the version in the parent element.
You should have warned
is more appropriate.
I started this in the morning and didn't finish yet so sending what
I have.
-Original Message-
From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:59 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: POM construction specification
On Dec
Mine below.
On Dec 16, 2008, at 10:36 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
Comments in line
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph
because I
know
Thanks, I'll take a look. I'm interested in finally continuing the
work I started on a terse POM syntax earlier in the year and can start
by spec'ing out the interoperability needs.
On 16/12/2008, at 7:02 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph
38 matches
Mail list logo
