Hi,
On 12.11.20 20:00, Robert Scholte wrote:
Hi,
It is already several years ago where we started discussing about Maven Next
Generations.
Clearly we needed to work on the pom, because over time we're facing more and
more limitations.
For (Maven) Central the Model 4.0.0 will be required pom format, there's no
discussion about that. So we needed a new architecture where there's a local
pom that is transformed to Model 4.0.0 or where it can be generated.
With the implementation of MNG-6656 and the improvement with MNG-6957 we've
made the first and important steps based on pom transformation. If this concept
proofs itself, we can start thinking about enhancing the pom model.
When talking about Model 5.0.0 it looked like it would be great to introduce it
for Maven 5. There was even a period where we thought about skipping Maven 4,
just to sync the Model version with the Maven version.
However, we discovered that this would be a huge change, and that we would
probably need a couple of Maven 4 releases before moving to Maven 5. Maven 4
would consist of preparation releases.
I've started writing the build/consumer to proof that the it is indeed possible
to separate the local pom from the distributed pom, even though they both are
currently still Model 4.0.0 compatible.
The original idea was:
Maven 3: build/consumer feature disabled by default
Maven 4: build/consumer feature enabled by default
Maven 5: Model 5
We were worried that this wouldn't give us enough feedback.
maven-integration-testing shows that build/consumer does work. There should be
enough trust to enable it by default, it shouldn't impact existing projects
(the last find by Michael was actually great. It demonstrated the effect when
using threads. The fix made sense and Maven was stable again). But it is simply
not enough. We need much more feedback.
Meanwhile other improvements have been done, that has impact:
- new behavior of reactor commandline arguments
- upgrade of default versions of plugins per packaging type
- requiring Java 8
- Maven wrapper
- there's a PR waiting that will shift the logic of the
ProjectBuilder/ModelBuilder. As this is quite important for more people to
understand, I'll record a Q&A with Maarten+Martin soon and share it with you.
it would be nice to have a kind of information here on the dev list to
see what kind of consequences this has?
There are probably more, but all these already defend my opinion about the next
Maven version.
To me it is not a Maven 3 anymore, we're reached a point where we should start
calling it Maven 4.
The next release should probably have an alpha suffix, just to give users the
chance to do alpha testing.
With a new major version we start to produce high expectations with 4.X
I would suggest to do 3.7.0 first with support:
- new behavior of reactor commandline arguments(?) ?
- Maven 3: build/consumer feature disabled by default (??)
Needs more testing of corse...
cause this would help a lot of people... make it easier
and get rid of flatten part..
- Signing of artifacts etc. needed to solved first.
- requiring Java 8 (not a big issue; done for several Maven minor
versions before)
- Maven wrapper
getting all that above working fine... and mark a number of classes /
parts/modules as deprecated ... which has not being done yet.
Also I suggest to 3.7.0 instead of 4.0.0 for this cause otherise the
adoption is more hesitant than for a 4.0.0 which is a major version
upgrade....
Maven 4.0.0
- build/consumer feature enabled by default
- Remove old stuff
- break things and improve the build pom ...
- Remove maven-compat .. ? introducing maven-compat3 ?..
- Maybe JDK 11 base? (LTS?) just a thought
-
Also making a 3.7.0 before so we can learn things related to
build-consumer pom before going to Maven 4.0.0 ....where we can break
things which we can not in 3.7.0 ...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
