Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/19/16 um 17:53 schrieb Curtis Rueden: > Hi Christian, > > This is awesome. > > > == What works == > > With model version 4.0.0, Maven 3.4.0 now behaves exactly as before. And > the property overriding bug no longer occurs, either. This maintains build > reproducibility for my projects,

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Christian, This is awesome. == What works == With model version 4.0.0, Maven 3.4.0 now behaves exactly as before. And the property overriding bug no longer occurs, either. This maintains build reproducibility for my projects, for which I am very thankful. With model version 4.1.0, Maven

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/17/16 um 22:16 schrieb Curtis Rueden: > One question: for POM hierarchies with mixed model versions -- a 4.0.0 POM > which imports or extends a 4.1.0 POM or vice versa -- do you foresee any > complications? Parent and child need to use the same model version. There is no way to support

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Curtis Rueden wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > > In fact, nowhere does it talk about what happens when dependencyManagement > comes in through both the parent and through imports. It does say, however: > I agree that both the doc and the code are

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Sorry I am so late to this party. I find that Apache Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT (90f26c279af9738735be8f84f60dcf21b6244e24; 2016-07-22T11:23:04-04:00) prefers .mvn/maven.config options instead of specifically listed parameters. This is surprising to me. I expect the .mvn/maven.config options to be

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Stephane, > The problem is that "pom-whiz" extends from "pom-base". You have a > scenario where a "whiz" project extends from "pom-base" and then > import "pom-whiz". Said "pom-whiz", via inheritance, "imports" > "pom-base" again. Yep, you got it. > Independently on the issue described in

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Curtis Rueden wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > Apologies up front for my long reply here. I divided into sections to help > break things up. > > > *== Expected behavior? Or a defect? ==* > > > if you expect the parent to override something you've

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Curtis Rueden wrote: > Hi Christian & Stephane, > > Thanks for your replies. > > Christian Schulte wrote: > > I am thinking about introducing model version "4.1.0" in Maven 3.4. > > I like this idea. Thanks for putting it forward! > > One

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Christian & Stephane, Thanks for your replies. Christian Schulte wrote: > I am thinking about introducing model version "4.1.0" in Maven 3.4. I like this idea. Thanks for putting it forward! One question: for POM hierarchies with mixed model versions -- a 4.0.0 POM which imports or extends

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Curtis Rueden wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > Apologies up front for my long reply here. I divided into sections to help > break things up. > I appreciate the time you took to reply. I'll focus on the first part for now. > > > *== Expected

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/17/16 um 04:09 schrieb Mark Derricutt: > On 17 Aug 2016, at 12:32, Christian Schulte wrote: > >> There is an easy way to solve this. Maven validates the model version in >> the POM to match "4.0.0". Based on that version, Maven can decide how to >> behave. I am thinking about introducing

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On 17 Aug 2016, at 12:32, Christian Schulte wrote: > There is an easy way to solve this. Maven validates the model version in > the POM to match "4.0.0". Based on that version, Maven can decide how to > behave. I am thinking about introducing model version "4.1.0" in Maven > 3.4. All existing

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/16/16 um 23:14 schrieb Curtis Rueden: > properly with Maven 3.4.0. But I am very concerned about the precedent > here: at any point in the future, complex builds which used to work might > stop doing so, even without a major version increment, due to future > changes in the logic of core

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Stephane, Apologies up front for my long reply here. I divided into sections to help break things up. *== Expected behavior? Or a defect? ==* > if you expect the parent to override something you've defined > in the child, that's not the expected behaviour at all. It certainly _has_ been

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hello Curtis, I have no opinion on your project (To be honest, I haven't looked in details yet, quite a large setup) but if you expect the parent to override something you've defined in the child, that's not the expected behaviour at all. That's still a problem for you though, I am not denying

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Christian, Thank you for all your time and effort. > Could you please test properties can correctly be overridden again in > the latest 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT In my tests, setting a version property in the POM still does not override the version as it did in 3.3.9:

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Stephane, Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Backwards compatibility, but with a "stop sucking" flag which enables the new better behavior? As I said previously, unless the previous behavior is preserved, all of my communy's existing releases (hundreds of projects, thousands of tags)

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 08/13/16 um 00:28 schrieb Christian Schulte: > > reviewing things. So current state of this is: "That's the behaviour > > requested and tested during commiting to MNG-5971. Cannot override > > properties? Really

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/15/16 um 20:49 schrieb David Hoffer: > I will try to test with 3.2.2 but I can confirm that 3.2.5 does not have > this behavior as that is our official build version for this application. > I am trying to move to latest maven version and discovered this. A project to reproduce this would be

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

I will try to test with 3.2.2 but I can confirm that 3.2.5 does not have this behavior as that is our official build version for this application. I am trying to move to latest maven version and discovered this. Regards, -Dave On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Christian Schulte

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/15/16 um 20:30 schrieb David Hoffer: > I'm testing with build 110 and have found an error with one of our current > builds (it works through 3.3.9). It's a bit of an odd-ball case. > > We have a child parent pom module that has several children if its own. > One of those child modules uses

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

I'm testing with build 110 and have found an error with one of our current builds (it works through 3.3.9). It's a bit of an odd-ball case. We have a child parent pom module that has several children if its own. One of those child modules uses a variable for the module name. E.g. exchange

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On 13/08/2016 01:47, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 08/12/16 um 15:58 schrieb Samuel Langlois: > > Thanks for your answer Robert. > > It is a bit more complicated than just being unable to override a > property. > > It's more that you can't change a dependencyManagement defined above by > >

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/12/16 um 15:58 schrieb Samuel Langlois: > Thanks for your answer Robert. > It is a bit more complicated than just being unable to override a property. > It's more that you can't change a dependencyManagement defined above by > overriding a property. > Anyway, I think it deserves an issue to

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Could you please test properties can correctly be overridden again in the latest 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT available from . It should have been fixed by this commit

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

The code in question is in class 'DefaultModelBuilder'. Everything is done by those two methods: public ModelBuildingResult build( ModelBuildingRequest request ) public ModelBuildingResult build( ModelBuildingRequest request, ModelBuildingResult result ) Called in that order.

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/13/16 um 00:28 schrieb Christian Schulte: > reviewing things. So current state of this is: "That's the behaviour > requested and tested during commiting to MNG-5971. Cannot override > properties? Really requested behaviour? Maybe incorrect. Need to look at > it again. There was a reason it

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/12/16 um 20:11 schrieb Curtis Rueden: > Hi Christian, > > Thank you very much for looking at my example, and your speedy reply. > >> Can you please add your objections to MNG-5971 in JIRA. > > Done. I also added the same comments to MNG-6079, which I believe is a > legitimate regression

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi Christian, Thank you very much for looking at my example, and your speedy reply. > Can you please add your objections to MNG-5971 in JIRA. Done. I also added the same comments to MNG-6079, which I believe is a legitimate regression caused by the fixing of MNG-5971. > > 2) I do not know how

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 12.08.2016 um 19:16 schrieb Curtis Rueden: Hi all, Concerned by this thread, I did some tests. And I have to say, the new Maven 3.4.0 dependency resolution rules seem like a step backwards. == REAL-WORLD EXAMPLE == Consider the following project:

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Can you please add your objections to MNG-5971 in JIRA. Maybe by copy and pasting your email. Reverting to the old behaviour is problematic and most of the users having taken part in that discussion will disagree with you, I think. The issue has been filed due to real-world problems. There are

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi all, Concerned by this thread, I did some tests. And I have to say, the new Maven 3.4.0 dependency resolution rules seem like a step backwards. == REAL-WORLD EXAMPLE == Consider the following project: https://github.com/fiji/fiji/blob/ced9faee1c4fba9997a3d614759fb6e78e359d4f/pom.xml Amongst

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 08/12/16 um 14:41 schrieb Samuel Langlois: > Hello > > I noticed a change of behaviour in Maven 3.4, which made one of our builds > fail. > It may be a bit of a corner case, so I'll let someone else decide whether > it's a regression or a bug fix... You can read all about it here:

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Thanks for your answer Robert. It is a bit more complicated than just being unable to override a property. It's more that you can't change a dependencyManagement defined above by overriding a property. Anyway, I think it deserves an issue to be looked at properly, so I created

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

This should be treated as a bug. Many builds, including ours, relies on being able to override properties defined in the parent hierarchy in a module POM. This change you are describing would break a lot of builds... > On Aug 12, 2016, at 8:41 AM, Samuel Langlois

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hello I noticed a change of behaviour in Maven 3.4, which made one of our builds fail. It may be a bit of a corner case, so I'll let someone else decide whether it's a regression or a bug fix... We have a submodule where the "parent" pom contains a dependency with scope=import, but with the

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Spring folks agree it is a bug. See StackOverflow link for details -Dan On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Dan Tran wrote: > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/38555184/json-simple-marked-as-optional-under-spring-boot-dependencies-intentional > > For my case, i override it

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hello, I just published a Docker image at https://hub.docker.com/r/mfriedenhagen/docker-maven/. However, because I often use Maven in a CI environment I replaced the gossip and jansi jars with slf4j-simple. After adapting findbugs-maven-plugin to 3.0.4 my projects run successfully. Regards Mirko

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/38555184/json-simple-marked-as-optional-under-spring-boot-dependencies-intentional For my case, i override it at my BOM -D On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 07/24/16 um 19:25 schrieb Dan Tran: > > Yes, I need to

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 07/24/16 um 19:25 schrieb Dan Tran: > Yes, I need to override the original import with 'optional' set to false. > At the same time, i file a bug with spring to see if it is intentional > This is what I would do as well. If the majority of users will never need that dependency and it is not

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Yes, I need to override the original import with 'optional' set to false. At the same time, i file a bug with spring to see if it is intentional Thanks -D On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Christian Schulte wrote: > Am 07/24/16 um 09:32 schrieb Dan Tran: > > yes, found

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 07/24/16 um 09:32 schrieb Dan Tran: > yes, found this > > > com.googlecode.json-simple > json-simple > ${simple-json.version} > true > > > at sprint-boot-dependencies-1.2.8's dependencyManagement. This may be a > bug of the BOM. Not sure why it is set as optional and it is the only one >

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/boot/spring-boot-dependencies/1.3.6.RELEASE/spring-boot-dependencies-1.3.6.RELEASE.pom On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Dan Tran wrote: > yes, found this > > > com.googlecode.json-simple > json-simple >

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

yes, found this com.googlecode.json-simple json-simple ${simple-json.version} true at sprint-boot-dependencies-1.2.8's dependencyManagement. This may be a bug of the BOM. Not sure why it is set as optional and it is the only one in that BOM. Thanks -D On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 4:12 PM,

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Am 07/23/16 um 23:41 schrieb Dan Tran: > Looks good on my 170 modules with Takari's smart builder build. Except > one module with one transitive dependency disappears and causes compilation > error. > > Any suggestion how to troubleshoot is very much reproducible build failure? Could be caused

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Looks good on my 170 modules with Takari's smart builder build. Except one module with one transitive dependency disappears and causes compilation error. Any suggestion how to troubleshoot is very much reproducible build failure? Thanks -Dan On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Mark Derricutt

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > This is only a current state of development (Git hash: > 90f26c279af9738735be8f84f60dcf21b6244e24) to get some feedback from the > community... > Have been using daily HEAD builds as my daily driver for the past

Re: Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi, > If you like to help making the next Maven release better it would be > nice if you could help a little bit. > > Please be aware of this *** This is not an official release *** > > Every kind of feedback is helpful. the good needs is that I found no regressions (testing several large

Preleminary Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT Testing (Take 3)

Hi to all Maven users, If you like to help making the next Maven release better it would be nice if you could help a little bit. Please be aware of this *** This is not an official release *** I have created downloadable packages which are available from here: Windows: