Am 2024-06-28 um 20:41 schrieb Slawomir Jaranowski:
Hi,
Thanks for hard work on doxia.
We have already discussed about versions for Maven core plugins.
So we can try again about it ... the most important question is - should we
map Maven API version in plugin version ...?
But I will try in a separate thread.
I think yes, that would be straight forward and consistent across the
board for our plugins. I that spirit I would leave Maven Site Plugin
master on 4.0.0-Mx and gnodet@ can apply Maven 4 API changes and the 3.x
branch would receives all Doxia 2.0.0 changes and I'd bump the minor
version.
I think that we should provide a new site plugin and Doxia 2.0 for Maven 3.x
In the current version we have many transitive dependencies with reported
security issues - for some users it is important.
Yes, see above. Maintaining three versions does not make sense.
I have a question about migration (maybe I'm a lazy to figure out it by
myself)
Can we mix in one project m-site-p 4.x with reports depends on doxia 1.x
and doxia 2.x
Yes, BUT:
* You need to use m-site-p 4 with Doxia 2.0.0 stack to cover both worlds
* Runtime behavior cannot guaranteed. All ITs I currently run use a
mixed setup and do not fail, but only because I take good care of all
reporting plugins. It might be as simple as upgrading deps or as complex
as rewriting parts of your code. It totally depends on the actual plugin.
We can provide needed upgrades for reports maintained by the Maven team
But I'm afraid that there will be some 3rd party reports that will depend
on doxia 1.x
How users can manage it?
Again, see above. A well-maintained plugin would require less than a day
of work, if not even less.
M
pon., 24 cze 2024 o 17:03 Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> napisał(a):
Guys,
I am very close to complete ongoing effort for the Maven Doxia 2.0.0 stack
upgrade throughout our codebase.
Please review the following e-mail I'd like to send out to users@ and dev@
(CC) for the public:
https://gist.github.com/michael-o/93b9cece8e10939a45b083bc1af7bcfe/edit
Open questions from my side:
* Is timeline OK? Not too long or too short?
* What is missing?
* What upgraded versions of the plugins should I use? I thought next
major, but that seems to conflict with the 3 for 3 and 4 for 4 approach?
* Should Maven Site Plugin remain at 4 in that regard or should I move to
a new minor and gnodet@ will move the master to Maven 4 API?
I'll leave you at least a week to discuss until I send this announcement
next week or so.
Waiting for your input,
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
