RE: SV: Mojo and it's own dependencies

Hi Great - I'll take a peek Hermod -Original Message- From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:02 AM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: SV: Mojo and it's own dependencies On 31 Oct 06, at 9:06 AM 31 Oct 06, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PRO

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 12/20/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: John Just a few small suggestions: In the menu on the far left: Overview Introduction Usage FAQ Examples Generating Votes Report Generating Resolved Issues Report Generating A Custom Report suggest: Overview

Re: problem with separation of "java" and "resources"

I'm not sure if eclipse supports it, but with IDEA, the package view keep the resources and the java sources together. Joerg Hohwiller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi there everybody, from the separation of concerns view of the maven plugins I can see the point in s

Re: Getting together a release

Ok, I'm now looking into it. I'll try and pull down central from ibiblio at some point to do it locally, but I will likely muddle with repository.maven.org too. Please let me know if that's a problem. I have scheduled '1.0'. This reflects the 1.0-SNAPSHOT in the POM. It is not the final ver

Re: Getting together a release

On 19 Dec 06, at 9:14 PM 19 Dec 06, Joakim Erdfelt wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: On 19 Dec 06, at 4:31 PM 19 Dec 06, Brett Porter wrote: Hi, I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since there has been

Re: Getting together a release

Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 19 Dec 06, at 4:31 PM 19 Dec 06, Brett Porter wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on >> repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since >> there has been a spike in interest and we can't really just r

Re: versioning

Seems there is some misunderstanding here, I agree in many things you said, extend version schemas, allow different schemas to be pluggable if possible, set a default schema as "standard",... I'd just prefer have xml syntax over string parsing and encourage people to use whatever the standard we c

Re: SV: Mojo and it's own dependencies

On 31 Oct 06, at 9:06 AM 31 Oct 06, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi I am now able to look at it. I suppose the what you refer to as "common project called maven-ant" is not the maven-ant plugin? What is the svn of this? Long delay, but I was just able to get the samp

re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

John Just a few small suggestions: In the menu on the far left: Overview Introduction Usage FAQ Examples Generating Votes Report Generating Resolved Issues Report Generating A Custom Report suggest: Overview Introduction Usage FAQs Examples Gene

Re: Getting together a release

Brett Porter wrote: > Hi, > > I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on > repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since > there has been a spike in interest and we can't really just recommend > people grab it from SVN. > > Other than that issue, doe

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On 12/20/06, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, December 19, 2006 5:15 pm, Bhupendra Bhardwaj wrote: >> The most simple solution right now is probably to add >> http://repo1.maven.org/eclipse/ to your list of repositories in >> settings.xml. > Not really. Because the solution I w

problem with separation of "java" and "resources"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi there everybody, from the separation of concerns view of the maven plugins I can see the point in separating "java" and "resources" in src/main and src/test. - From the users point of view this is quite ugly: - -If you are looking at a java file

Re: maven2 and NTLM

On 19/12/2006, at 9:39 PM, Steve Loughran wrote: Anyone interested in working on this? Thanks for volunteering! :) - Brett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Getting together a release

On 19 Dec 06, at 4:31 PM 19 Dec 06, Brett Porter wrote: Hi, I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since there has been a spike in interest and we can't really just recommend people grab it from SV

RE: Getting together a release

I think one of the "got to haves" is the ability to proxy across artifacts even if the checksum is bad. I know there are a couple of patches out there to fix this but without this in the release it makes usefulness of Archiva pretty minimal. Other than that we have been using the project to supp

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > the repository has some rules and you have to follow them to be > manageable, eg. you name jars artifactId-version.jar and not > otherwise. If there are version rules you'd have to follow

Re: Getting together a release

On 19 Dec 06, at 4:31 PM 19 Dec 06, Brett Porter wrote: Hi, I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since there has been a spike in interest and we can't really just recommend people grab it from SV

Re: ApacheCon Talks

I'll submit a "Maven Archiva", a "Project Visibility with Maven" talk and a "Apache Repository BOF". If anyone is interested on working on them with me, just ping me. - Brett On 20/12/2006, at 1:47 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning Apach

Getting together a release

Hi, I am going to start looking into the issue with Archiva hanging on repository.maven.org, then look at getting a release together, since there has been a spike in interest and we can't really just recommend people grab it from SVN. Other than that issue, does anyone have any "must fixe

Re: ApacheCon Talks

On 19 Dec 06, at 2:14 PM 19 Dec 06, Tom Huybrechts wrote: On 12/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: > >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning

Re: versioning

On 19 Dec 06, at 2:08 PM 19 Dec 06, Carlos Sanchez wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > the repository has some rules and you have to follow them to be > manageable, eg. you name jars artifactId-version.jar and not > otherwise. If there ar

Re: ApacheCon Talks

On 12/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: > >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon >>> talks. >> >> 1. "fear the repository police". We

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > the repository has some rules and you have to follow them to be > manageable, eg. you name jars artifactId-version.jar and not > otherwise. If there are version rules you'd have to follow, and I > don't see the p

Re: ApacheCon Talks

On 19 Dec 06, at 1:31 PM 19 Dec 06, Carlos Sanchez wrote: On 12/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: > >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning

Re: ApacheCon Talks

On 12/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: > >> Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon >>> talks. >> >> 1. "fear the repository police". We

Re: ApacheCon Talks

Jason van Zyl wrote: On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon talks. 1. "fear the repository police". We will pick people in the audience and beat them with rolled up copies of th

Re: ApacheCon Talks

On 19 Dec 06, at 12:28 PM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon talks. 1. "fear the repository police". We will pick people in the audience and beat them with rolled up copies of the pom schema until

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

John Tolentino wrote: [snip] Right. I personally don't like raw maven output on such a page - the docck report plugin should just generate a normal report page, preferrably embed it in this page. I'll see what I can do on translating docck return values into a suitable report. Ok cool.

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

On 12/19/06, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: robert burrell donkin wrote: > On 12/19/06, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I'd like to see POM auditing in there somewhere. > > +1 > > henri's been talking about adding this to RAT. IMHO this should be > implemented as a

Re: maven-eclipse-plugin release: vote result and follow up (was: [vote] release maven-eclipse-plugin)

Hi, Fabrizio Giustina wrote: The vote for the release of the eclipse plugin (and related shared libraries) closed with 3 positive PMC binding votes (me, jason, stephane) + two positive user votes. I also voted, btw (on the 2nd try). However, due to recent discussions on how votes should be c

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: the repository has some rules and you have to follow them to be manageable, eg. you name jars artifactId-version.jar and not otherwise. If there are version rules you'd have to follow, and I don't see the problem in having a standardized version convention, as we have st

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 12/19/06, John Tolentino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Everyone, Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and this is a mock of what it should look like: http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html We can send this generated page to the dev l

Re: versioning

Richard van der Hoff wrote: Kenney Westerhof wrote: Richard van der Hoff wrote: Hi, Carlos Sanchez wrote: Regarding Kenney's proposal: as discussed on #maven, all sounds very sensible to me. I'm still fishing for, and failing to find, examples of failures for projects where people invert the

Re: ApacheCon Talks

Jason van Zyl wrote: Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon talks. 1. "fear the repository police". We will pick people in the audience and beat them with rolled up copies of the pom schema until they promise not to publish invalid metadata. we will start off

Re: versioning

Kenney Westerhof wrote: Richard van der Hoff wrote: Hi, Carlos Sanchez wrote: Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all tooling on top of Maven Can you justify that with an example, at all? What about forcing the xml schema to a standard versioning system. If it'

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: On 12/19/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whatever parser/validation code you write will need to be used in all > tooling, like any IDE pom editor, pom converters,... you may say > that's fine but think that tools could also be implemented in other > lang

Re: versioning

ir. ing. Jan Dockx wrote: On 19 Dec 2006, at 17:50, Kenney Westerhof wrote: What tool uses those invariant annotations? Looks useful for application validation. ;-) Let's discuss that off-line. cool, [EMAIL PROTECTED]://irc.codehaus.org/#maven [snip] ... ... [versionS

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whatever parser/validation code you write will need to be used in all > tooling, like any IDE pom editor, pom converters,... you may say > that's fine but think that tools could also be implemented in other > languages. I don't see why t

Re: versioning

On 19/12/06, ir. ing. Jan Dockx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 19 Dec 2006, at 17:50, Kenney Westerhof wrote: > What tool uses those invariant annotations? Looks useful for > application validation. ;-) Let's discuss that off-line. How comes? I'd be interested too. Mark -

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > and almost all artifacts in repo can be expressed as 4 different > alphanumeric sections, so no problem there, And the ones that can't? We don't care about those? And the ones in peoples private repositories?

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: On 12/19/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all > tooling on top of Maven > How so? The current implementation is too complex, this one is pretty straight forward - it a

Re: versioning

On 19 Dec 2006, at 17:50, Kenney Westerhof wrote: Hi, ir. ing. Jan Dockx wrote: Well, your schema does follow the Java standard (java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/versioning/spec/ versioning2.html#wp89936>). That might be a good default. Maven could apply a strategy pattern to allow for ot

Re: versioning

Kenney Westerhof wrote: Richard van der Hoff wrote: Hi, Carlos Sanchez wrote: Regarding Kenney's proposal: as discussed on #maven, all sounds very sensible to me. I'm still fishing for, and failing to find, examples of failures for projects where people invert the precedence of . and -; howeve

Re: versioning

Hi, ir. ing. Jan Dockx wrote: Well, your schema does follow the Java standard (). That might be a good default. Maven could apply a strategy pattern to allow for other versioning schemes. Only 3 functions are n

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 12/20/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, some more comments: First: very nice, extremely handy for voting. Jason van Zyl wrote: > On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote: > >> Hi Everyone, >> >> Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candida

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: and almost all artifacts in repo can be expressed as 4 different alphanumeric sections, so no problem there, And the ones that can't? We don't care about those? And the ones in peoples private repositories? -- Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Telephony Gateways

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > the other tags that can be reduced, but losing simplicity. Not using > attributes also makes the pom verbose and nobody questions that. They do, actually - it's been discussed here before. let me rephrase, a m

Re: versioning

My proposal would solve that: -, for instance (1.0-3.2) would work just fine. In this case spec versions take precedence over impl versions, but that's generally what you want anyway. -- kenney ir. ing. Jan Dockx wrote: Ah. Well. Most libraries (think Jakarta commons) have a spec side and an im

Re: versioning

Well, your schema does follow the Java standard (). That might be a good default. Maven could apply a strategy pattern to allow for other versioning schemes. Only 3 functions are needed, as far as I can see:

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

Hi, some more comments: First: very nice, extremely handy for voting. Jason van Zyl wrote: On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote: Hi Everyone, Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and this is a mock of what it should look like: http://people.a

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On Tue, December 19, 2006 5:15 pm, Bhupendra Bhardwaj wrote: >> The most simple solution right now is probably to add >> http://repo1.maven.org/eclipse/ to your list of repositories in >> settings.xml. > Not really. Because the solution I was looking for was to package my RCP > app > for all plat

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: the other tags that can be reduced, but losing simplicity. Not using attributes also makes the pom verbose and nobody questions that. They do, actually - it's been discussed here before. As I said we can have a pure String representation for those projects that don't wan

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 19 Dec 06, at 10:38 AM 19 Dec 06, John Casey wrote: On 12/19/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe some SCM information, what system is being used and the "label" instead of revision which is SVN specific and a link, if possible, to that revision in the SCM. For SVN and CVS t

Re: versioning

Ah. Well. Most libraries (think Jakarta commons) have a spec side and an implementation side. According to the spec, we would need something like 1.2.3-4567. The spec suggests, but does not limit to, a build number for the implementation identification. There is no problem with the major.mi

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 12/19/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe some SCM information, what system is being used and the "label" instead of revision which is SVN specific and a link, if possible, to that revision in the SCM. For SVN and CVS this is easy with ViewCVS. IMO, it needs to be more tha

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On 12/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, what is the way forward? The most simple solution right now is probably to add http://repo1.maven.org/eclipse/ to your list of repositories in settings.xml. Not really. Because the solution I was looking for was to package my R

Re: versioning

Barrie Treloar wrote: >> I've had to comment out one assert: 2.0.1-xyz < 2.0.1. I think >> generally this is not the case. For example, >> the wiki guide to patching plugins states that you could patch a >> plugin and change it's version to 2.0-INTERNAL. >> In this case, 2.0 would be newer than 2.0

Re: versioning

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > After that, you can add something with "-" which maven will just > string-compare (so alpha10 comes between alpha1 and alpha2). Not true, actually. Maven actually has some weird extra logic that kicks in when one string component is a prefix of the other, such that actu

Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool

On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote: Hi Everyone, Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and this is a mock of what it should look like: http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html We can send this generated page to the

Re: versioning

> > 1 > 2 > 1 > 123 > It's just as simple to specify a regexp which defines what is allowed as the text child for the version element. Do not break everything up into one element. That's an XML sickness from the DTD era (or rather the pre-XSD/Schema era). Regards, -- Aaron Digulla

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

> So, what is the way forward? The most simple solution right now is probably to add http://repo1.maven.org/eclipse/ to your list of repositories in settings.xml. Regards, -- Aaron Digulla - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PR

JavaOne talks

Hi, More conference stuff. For JavaOne I have submitted a talk about Team Collaboration and Developer productivity and a talk on a large Ant conversion and the benefits derived from the conversion. This talk will be co-presented by an Architect at the large financial services company for

ApacheCon Talks

Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon talks. I'm planning on doing the introduction to Maven talk, and I'm talking with Rod Coffin about working with him on his Enterprise Maven talk and I would also like to once again organize the BOFs I did the last time

ApacheCon Talks

Hi, Just checking in with folks to see if anyone is planning ApacheCon talks. I'm planning on doing the introduction to Maven talk, and I'm talking with Rod Coffin about working with him on his Enterprise Maven talk and I would also like to once again organize the BOFs I did the last time

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: > Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all > tooling on top of Maven > How so? The current implementation is too complex, this one is pretty straight forward - it allows for versions of an

Re: Maven and Fedora

On 19 Dec 06, at 5:52 AM 19 Dec 06, Steve Loughran wrote: Jason van Zyl wrote: Yah, I don't buy it. I don't know anyone who uses RPMs to do anything with Java. Nobody who works java does, but the goal is to let people who work with OSS systems use Java apps the way they work with C++, Per

Re: versioning

Richard van der Hoff wrote: Hi, Carlos Sanchez wrote: Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all tooling on top of Maven Can you justify that with an example, at all? What about forcing the xml schema to a standard versioning system. If it's used then you'll benefi

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

robert burrell donkin wrote: On 12/19/06, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd like to see POM auditing in there somewhere. +1 henri's been talking about adding this to RAT. IMHO this should be implemented as a separate component so that it could be used by a variety of applicatio

Re: versioning

Stephane Nicoll wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Stéphane also suggested forcing a particular versioning convention on everybody - the same argument applies. I am not sure that's what I meant. If we want to be able to compare versions we need to standardize

Re: versioning

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 19.12.2006 01:26:54: I've seen projects switch back and forth... depends on who is in power at the time and what style they like. So it would be best if mvn would be able comprehend: Since versions are such an important

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all tooling on top of Maven How so? The current implementation is too complex, this one is pretty straight forward - it allows for versions of any length. What about forcing the xml schema to a standard v

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

On 12/19/06, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd like to see POM auditing in there somewhere. +1 henri's been talking about adding this to RAT. IMHO this should be implemented as a separate component so that it could be used by a variety of applications: for example, it might be i

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Stéphane also suggested forcing a particular versioning convention on everybody - the same argument applies. I am not sure that's what I meant. If we want to be able to compare versions we need to standardize things. That sounds obvio

Re: versioning

Carlos Sanchez wrote: Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all tooling on top of Maven Can you justify that with an example, at all? What about forcing the xml schema to a standard versioning system. If it's used then you'll benefit from all Maven goodies. If you ju

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

On 12/19/06, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Joakim, I like this discussion, I am a big fan of automating the release process. I also have some hands on experience being RM for Ant 1.6 and 1.7. For Ant 1.7, we are using what you call the staged release process. When I pr

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

Hello Joakim, I like this discussion, I am a big fan of automating the release process. I also have some hands on experience being RM for Ant 1.6 and 1.7. For Ant 1.7, we are using what you call the staged release process. When I prepare a build, I have to assume that the vote on the bina

Re: The Future of the Release Process.

Joakim Erdfelt wrote: This is just a synopsis email about the future of the release process. Disclaimer: I am not attempting to set policy, just to get discussion going, document it, and work towards the ideal toolchain that make the future of apache releases smooth

Re: Maven and Fedora

Jason van Zyl wrote: Yah, I don't buy it. I don't know anyone who uses RPMs to do anything with Java. Nobody who works java does, but the goal is to let people who work with OSS systems use Java apps the way they work with C++, Perl, python, mono and ruby code --with one central managem

Re: versioning

Sound like a lot of added complexity that will cause trouble to all tooling on top of Maven What about forcing the xml schema to a standard versioning system. If it's used then you'll benefit from all Maven goodies. If you just use a String Maven will do its best. For instance 1 2 1 123

Re: maven2 and NTLM

Brett Porter wrote: google says... http.auth.ntlm.domain http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/net/properties.html Could be worth exposing this via the settings into the lightweight wagon, and passing the equivalent to the httpclient wagon via it's authenticators. - Brett FWIW, Ant1.

Re: Maven and Gentoo

Alistair Bush wrote: After browsing thru the conversation relating to Maven and Fedora I thought I would put in the Gentoo Linux's perspective. (snip) Sadly we only have support for ant presently. I wouldnt say sadly :) To accomplish this we had to implement some funky build.xml rewri

Re: versioning

From the spec: A version string is a series of positive numbers separated by periods. The numbers are compared component by component from left to right. If any number is greater than the corresponding number of the supplied string the method returns true. If the number is less than it returns f

Re: versioning

I believe that Maven version number support should at least make it possible to apply the specification / implementation version numbering scheme that is part of the Java standard (java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/versioning/spec/ versioning2.html#wp89936>). On 19 Dec 2006, at 9:33, [EM

Re: versioning

On 12/19/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've seen projects switch back and forth... depends on who is in power at the time and what style they like. So it would be best if mvn would be able comprehend: 1.0alpha2 < 1.0-alpha-3 I disagree. I don't think it will help maven use

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

Hi all, So, what is the way forward? Is that till we have the feature Graham is working on (downloading eclipse jars from links like http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-3.2.1-200609210945/) we have to download those jars seperately from those urls and may be put in the project's

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On 12/19/06, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, December 19, 2006 10:24 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > =8*O I beg your pardon? I looked in JIRA but couldn't find a report about > this. Is there? If not, I'd open one. ;-) > > The idea that you'll never have to fix a broken POM/JAR/

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On Tue, December 19, 2006 10:24 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > =8*O I beg your pardon? I looked in JIRA but couldn't find a report about > this. Is there? If not, I'd open one. ;-) > > The idea that you'll never have to fix a broken POM/JAR/whatever is just > ridiculous. :-) As I understand it, th

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

On 12/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 18.12.2006 17:53:54: > The problem I saw posted recently about this was that once published, the > repository is cast in stone, including errors. =8*O I beg your pardon? I looked in JIRA bu

Re: versioning

Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 19.12.2006 01:26:54: > I've seen projects switch back and forth... depends on who is in > power at the time and what style they like. So it would be best if > mvn would be able comprehend: Since versions are such an important information in Maven, Ma

Re: downloading eclipse runtime binary or RCP delta pack

"Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 18.12.2006 17:53:54: > The problem I saw posted recently about this was that once published, the > repository is cast in stone, including errors. =8*O I beg your pardon? I looked in JIRA but couldn't find a report about this. Is there? If not, I'd