I've added +1 on the proposal.
I'm still seeing build failures with maven3. Please see the issue.
On 28/06/11 19:49, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I should point out that we should be able to go ahead with the patch and
> proposal. At this point we have a couple of +1 votes...
>
> - Andrea you indicated
I have been using maven3 for development for some time now.
I think there are two possible easy solutions for hudson/jenkins.
- You can configure all builds to use a private maven repository. This
is the general recommendation but may require that all builds are
published to a snapshot reposito
I should point out that we should be able to go ahead with the patch and
proposal. At this point we have a couple of +1 votes...
- Andrea you indicated enthusiasm but did not vote? Anything to add...
- Ben how are you set to go on this?
--
Jody Garnett
On Tuesday, 28 June 2011 at 9:02 PM, Mi
I guess it has to be experiment.
When Hudson runs a deploy job, time-stamped jars will end up in the
OSGeo repo. We only need to keep the most recent ones since this is
effectively what we were doing with non-timestamped jars.
As far as I understand from the stackoverflow discussion, the problem,
So Java 6 has gone out; meaning we can take up with maven 3 again.
So far the interesting question has been with respect to the handling of
SNAPSHOTS:
a) Justin will need to ask maven to clear out snapshots after a bit?
b) Developers should only have one snapshot jar; but there is some
discussion
Hi Justin,
On 23 June 2011 23:58, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Hmm... we'll definitely need to add a cron job or something to clean up old
> jar files since that will fill up disk space on gridlock in no time.
>
Yes. That should be easy because there's no need to keep anything but
the latest jar.
Hmm... we'll definitely need to add a cron job or something to clean up old
jar files since that will fill up disk space on gridlock in no time.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:01 AM, Michael Bedward
wrote:
> I understand that maven 3 forces you to have time-stamped snapshots
> because the uniqueVersio
+1 on proposal (and i agree after the java 6 switch seems appropriate). To
prepare I can install maven 3 on the build server and set it up in hudson
but won;t change any of the jobs over to it yet.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 1:18 AM, wrote:
> Zitat von Andrea Aime :
>
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:
I understand that maven 3 forces you to have time-stamped snapshots
because the uniqueVersion parameter is not supported. Will that create
any problems ?
Michael
--
Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual envir
Zitat von Andrea Aime :
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Severin (aka Cliff)
> wrote:
>
>> Hi People,
>>
>>
>> I've written up a proposal on the wiki with regard to updating the GeoTools
>> build process to work under both Maven 2 and 3.
>>
>> Justin: jgarnett suggested I open a dialogue with
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Severin (aka Cliff) wrote:
> Hi People,
>
>
> I've written up a proposal on the wiki with regard to updating the GeoTools
> build process to work under both Maven 2 and 3.
>
> Justin: jgarnett suggested I open a dialogue with you to see if you have
> any interest i
Hi People,
I've written up a proposal on the wiki with regard to updating the GeoTools
build process to work under both Maven 2 and 3.
Justin: jgarnett suggested I open a dialogue with you to see if you have any
interest in updating the build box to use Maven 3 yet.
Proposal is at
http://docs.c
12 matches
Mail list logo
