Rather than just fork in a permanent direction, why not make the patches and integration tests and then get them applied to the project? You'll essentially have to do it anyway and then you can build upon the work of everyone else.
-----Original Message----- From: Eric Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 1:13 AM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Should I fork off 2.0.5 or 2.1? My project's decided to continue using maven and patch it as necessary to fix bugs in maven that we're no longer willing to live with. I tried for an hour or two to get my project to build under 2.1, but gave up and figured it was under too much active development anyway. What is the time frame for 2.1 anyway? (3-months, 6-months, 2- years?) But I'm noticing that several of the bugs I have to patch in 2.0.5 are actually scheduled for 2.1 and some discuss architectural issues of maven that I'm not quite familiar with yet. Thus my question... These are the bugs I'm in the process of patching (on my project's fork of 2.0.5): MNG-1994 Execution order of child plugins is arbitrary if inheritance is involved. (Somebody should close this. It is fixed in 2.0.5.) MNG-1412 Dependency sorting in classpath. I updated the patch for this already. MNG-624 Every module must contain version info. MNG-2653 Using ${version} for subproject dependencies doesn't work. MNG-1949 Plugin dependencies in inherited plugins are ignored. John's comments a bit confusing to me. MNG-2823 Too many useless warning messages trying to download artifacts from all repositories. Cheers, Eric --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
