On 12/04/2007, at 4:15 PM, John Casey wrote:
1. Locking down on release is dangerous IMO, because it implies
that you
might be making a change to the build behavior at release time.
I don't think that was the intent. It was intended to capture exactly
what you used at release time. The problem you describe still remains
(if the stuff changes before you cut the release but after you last
tested it, which is why staging is a good idea). But locking it down
at release time is not the problem, it's the lack of locking it down
earlier (if that makes any sense).
2. WRT specifying all versions for lifecycle plugins, I'd suggest
the use of
either (a) a lifecycle/packaging version that would specify each
plugin's
version, as was suggested on the users@ list; or, (b) a new piece
of syntax
to specify a set of plugin versions that are commonly used together.
Agreed. Rough proposal to follow.
3. I think it's quite dangerous to keep on the track of having the
common
user use the current RELEASE meta-versions.
I think we need to consider ways to make this more workable in the
long run, especially since version ranges suffer the same problems.
The important thing to me is that it is possible to make it
deterministic, and that that is considered best practice and easily
encouraged by Maven.
Dan/Carlos/Wayne/etc.: would it be reasonable to provide some nice
plugins
(maybe with GUIs where we can) that will help users choose what
they need?
I think this helps, but I don't think it should be required to be
able to figure Maven out.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
