Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Project Info Reports Plugin version 3.6.1
Am 2024-06-23 um 21:12 schrieb Michael Osipov: Hi, we solved 3 issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317821&version=12354845 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MPIR/issues Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-2154/ https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-2154/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-project-info-reports-plugin/3.6.1/maven-project-info-reports-plugin-3.6.1-source-release.zip Source release checksum(s): maven-project-info-reports-plugin-3.6.1-source-release.zip sha512: b9f3b470184dbbe11f4a9a2fdfd782425debed63fbc9f36043c82f476b537b46f258a719d2465d8c7baeb3cc4ca58103931977b4e90adfa5752fcab5ee975542 Staging site: https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-project-info-reports-plugin-LATEST/ Guide to testing staged releases: https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html Vote open for 72 hours. +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [doxia] [DISCUSS] adding footnote processing to markdown
Michael, Flexmark has a number of extensions available, but both 1.12.0 and 2.0.0-M12 use a static to create the Flexmark parser. It would be nice to be able to pass a list of Flexmark extensions to be added to the defaults. The only way I can see to do this is to use configuration options and make the parser non-static. Would this be acceptable to you? I will start on the work but before I spend a lot of time figuring out how to make it work, I want to know if the solution has a chance of being accepted. Claude On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 8:43 PM Michael Osipov wrote: > Am 2024-06-16 um 15:58 schrieb Claude Warren: > > There is a standard footnote extension available from flexmark, and I > have > > a private branch of 1.12.0 that adds it. It seems to work. Is there any > > reason not to add this? > > > > I want to use it for some commons collections documentation where I want > to > > refer to various published papers. > > Please create a JIRA issue, the PR with a test for the feature, but I > won't merge anything into Doxia 1.x anymore because all is focused on > upcoming Doxia 2.0.0 stack. > > Michael > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [doxia] [DISCUSS] adding footnote processing to markdown
I see, you are referring to https://github.com/apache/maven-doxia/blob/master/doxia-modules/doxia-module-markdown/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/doxia/module/markdown/MarkdownParser.java#L126-L165 One of the issue is that I personally do not know what the implications might be in terms of performance, etc. Are parsers heavy weight or can they be created easily? If you have thousands of files and I had reports of people that they process tens of thousands of files... kwin@ has recently added a generic approach to configure a parser. I think if we are going to make this non-static you should pick it up. From my PoV we need his expertise to give you a defitive answer. Downside: That configuration approach is available only for Doxia 2.0.0. Konrad, can you look into Claude's request and tell us your opinion? On 2024/06/24 12:46:16 Claude Warren wrote: > Michael, > > Flexmark has a number of extensions available, but both 1.12.0 and > 2.0.0-M12 use a static to create the Flexmark parser. It would be nice to > be able to pass a list of Flexmark extensions to be added to the defaults. > The only way I can see to do this is to use configuration options and make > the parser non-static. Would this be acceptable to you? > > I will start on the work but before I spend a lot of time figuring out how > to make it work, I want to know if the solution has a chance of being > accepted. > > Claude > > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 8:43 PM Michael Osipov wrote: > > > Am 2024-06-16 um 15:58 schrieb Claude Warren: > > > There is a standard footnote extension available from flexmark, and I > > have > > > a private branch of 1.12.0 that adds it. It seems to work. Is there any > > > reason not to add this? > > > > > > I want to use it for some commons collections documentation where I want > > to > > > refer to various published papers. > > > > Please create a JIRA issue, the PR with a test for the feature, but I > > won't merge anything into Doxia 1.x anymore because all is focused on > > upcoming Doxia 2.0.0 stack. > > > > Michael > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[DRAFT] [HEADS UP] Maven Doxia 2.0.0 stack is coming
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
Re: [DRAFT] [HEADS UP] Maven Doxia 2.0.0 stack is coming
The link should read: https://gist.github.com/michael-o/93b9cece8e10939a45b083bc1af7bcfe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
