I think if we just change the plugin resolution so that it doesn't assume "RELEASE" if no version is set, it should be pretty easy right? IE someone can still put RELEASE as a version if they want to, but we would require something to be set and not just assume it. Or should we abandon RELEASE all together?
-----Original Message----- From: Arik Kfir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 12:39 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions +1 for that! On 4/11/07, Geoffrey De Smet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> "they need to specify versions for all of their plugins in the POM" > > > > We can't do this in 2.0.x but it needs to be mandatory in 2.1. > > > > Good! :) > > In my experience with spring-richclient most of the problems of an > instable build went away the day I locked down all versions. > > However you could do 2 things to make our lives easier: > > 1) Bundle a bunch of plugins together in a version so we can just > specify that bundle. > Say for example "we use plugin-bundle 2.0.6" (which means we use > assembly 2.0, site 2.0-beta5, ...). > Of course it should be possible to make an exception on a single > plugin in that bundle to give it another version anyway. > > Plugin-bundles would allow you to test more thoroughly if all plugins > work together nicely. > > 2) A site report (and maybe also a mvn cmd) to receive a list of all > plugins which can be updated. (This would be very welcome for > dependencies too btw.) > > With kind regards, > Geoffrey De Smet > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
