that works for me.
On 4/13/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd say that if in 1/2 weeks nobody finds critical bugs it should be
released final. Non critical bugs can be postponed to 1.0.1
On 4/13/07, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, though I'm a little curious whether
I'd say that if in 1/2 weeks nobody finds critical bugs it should be
released final. Non critical bugs can be postponed to 1.0.1
On 4/13/07, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1, though I'm a little curious whether it would be better to simply try to
release a 1.0. If this is good enough for
+1
On 4/13/07, Vincent Siveton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Vincent
2007/4/13, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> +1
>
> Arnaud
>
> On 13/04/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Emmanuel
> >
> > Jesse McConnell a écrit :
> > > With maven-scm having its late
+1
Vincent
2007/4/13, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Emmanuel
>
> Jesse McConnell a écrit :
> > With maven-scm having its latest release underway, the final linchpin
> > in getting alpha releases of continuum
+1
Vincent
2007/4/13, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carlos
Sanchez
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 5:13 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release maven-plugin-testing-harness
anyone?
+1
Vincent
2007/4/13, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carlos
Sanchez
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 5:12 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release maven-dependency-tree
anyone?
On 4/10
my late +1
Vincent
2007/4/13, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Results:
Binding: +4 (Brian,Luke,Stephane,Arnaud)
Nonbinding: + (Jerome)
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 3:40 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: [VOTE] maven
+1
Vincent
2007/4/12, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'd like to release version 1.0-alpha-5 of the
maven-remote-resources-plugin. This resolves one critical bug, but
also adds some new features to make it a bit more usable.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x Remote Resources Plugin - Version 1.0
+1
Vincent
2007/4/11, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
I'd like to release maven-stylus-skin 1.0.1. The only existing issue for
this skin has been fixed. The fix is needed by the upcoming version of
Doxia.
Release Notes:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11430
+1 :-)
On 4/13/07, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to release Maven SCM 1.0-rc1
> This version fix few bugs, add a new provider (mercurial) and few
> commands.
>
> Road Map:
>
>
http://jira.cod
+1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carlos
Sanchez
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 5:13 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release maven-plugin-testing-harness
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It a
+1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carlos
Sanchez
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 5:12 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release maven-dependency-tree
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This releas
+1
On 4/13/07, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> anyone?
>
> On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It adds some stub method implementations from previous releases
> >
> > Right now it's 1.0-beta-
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven SCM 1.0-rc1
This version fix few bugs, add a new provider (mercurial) and few
commands.
Road Map:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527&styleName=Html&version=13066
S
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Emmanuel
Jesse McConnell a écrit :
> With maven-scm having its latest release underway, the final linchpin
> in getting alpha releases of continuum up and running is the
> maven-release and maven-release-manager.
>
> So I
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It adds some stub method implementations from previous releases
>
> Right now it's 1.0-beta-2 but has been pretty stable during last year,
> so i'd suggest releasin
Sorry, didn't see it.
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This release adds iterator methods that simplify the tree navigation
>
> Right now is set to 1.0-alpha-3 but has been stable for months so I'
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It adds some stub method implementations from previous releases
Right now it's 1.0-beta-2 but has been pretty stable during last year,
so i'd suggest releasing 1.0 and whatever is added in the future go to
1.1, 1.2, ...
https://svn.
anyone?
On 4/10/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This release adds iterator methods that simplify the tree navigation
Right now is set to 1.0-alpha-3 but has been stable for months so I'd
go for 1.0-beta-1 or 1.0
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/shared/trunk/maven-dependency
+1
Emmanuel
Jesse McConnell a écrit :
With maven-scm having its latest release underway, the final linchpin
in getting alpha releases of continuum up and running is the
maven-release and maven-release-manager.
So I am calling a vote to get the maven-release parent pom released
and the maven-re
With maven-scm having its latest release underway, the final linchpin
in getting alpha releases of continuum up and running is the
maven-release and maven-release-manager.
So I am calling a vote to get the maven-release parent pom released
and the maven-release-manager which the continuum-release
I suppose that this is with maven 1.x ?
Which version ?
Which versions of the jar and artifact plugins ?
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Patrick Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You might try posing your question to the users' list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also, it would be helpful to provide some more inf
I forward this vote here for people that aren't on scm dev list, but if you
want to vote, the vote must be done on the scm dev list.
Emmanuel
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven SCM 1.0-rc1
This version fix few bugs, add a new provider (mercurial) and few commands.
Road Map:
h
You might try posing your question to the users' list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also, it would be helpful to provide some more information, such as stack
traces, error output, POMs, etc.
Patrick
On 4/13/07, Sohan Shetty <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
Hi,
We had a properly working in Build System in p
Hi,
We had a properly working in Build System in place.
However, yesterday, when a triggered a build, the JAVA project build
failed due to the below reason:
No goal obtained! 'attainGoal: jar: install'
When we ran maven on the JAVA project individually, we obtained the same
error. We skipped th
Hi,
feel free to steal the code from mojo.
but please, let me be informed as i could still contribute with patches.
Raphaël
2007/4/9, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I think we should continue to use ARCHETYPE and start planning
towards a 1.0 with the new code base. The current JIRA will nee
2007/4/9, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 8 Apr 07, at 10:41 PM 8 Apr 07, Brett Porter wrote:
> It seems apparent now that we should push forward with the ng
> stuff. I was going to test if it is at least equivalent to trunk
> and then propose bringing it in to replace trunk and start to
that's very ssh specific, more complex scenarios would use archiva and
control there the permissions.
if you want the ssh wagon look for the properties and use them if
present cool, but it'd be easier now to apply and test the patches in
WAGON-19
On 4/13/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
On 13 Apr 07, at 12:28 PM 13 Apr 07, John Casey wrote:
so, would the deploy plugin read these properties and set them on
the wagon
at deployment time,
Yah, the deployer in maven-artifact would use this and pop the right
things into Wagon.
or would you have some sort of cron job to keep
On 13 Apr 07, at 12:27 PM 13 Apr 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
WAGON-19 and MDEPLOY-28 have patches that would solve the problem with
metadata permissions among others.
We could also just make the properties a little more sophisticated to
allow for variation. I think just having a reference be
so, would the deploy plugin read these properties and set them on the wagon
at deployment time, or would you have some sort of cron job to keep things
honest? I'm guess you'll have to have both, since older versions of the
deploy plugin won't know to look for the repo.properties...
Overall, I thi
WAGON-19 and MDEPLOY-28 have patches that would solve the problem with
metadata permissions among others.
On 4/13/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm tired of screwing around with deployments not working with the
right permissions and groups. The last fix to the deployments ma
Yeah I've got it "mostly" working now with manual metadata removals.
On a side note - it looks like the permissions get written out correctly by
default when I locally modify the snapshotrepo distribution url to use
scpexe:// instead of relying on whatever the default is. (which doesn't
honor gro
only jason can do the chmod or even better run
/www/people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/fix-permissions.sh
if you want to fix it in the meantime, download the metadata files,
delete them in the server and upload again, then run
/www/people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/fix-perm
nevermind, I get it nowam trying a new deploy now
On 4/13/07, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Carlos!
Seems that this has happened in more than one place (and is also strangely
the default behavior of my deploy - though when I do it with tapestry on the
same repo it doesn't
Hi,
I'm tired of screwing around with deployments not working with the
right permissions and groups. The last fix to the deployments make
the permissions decent by default but that's not enough as I deployed
something that didn't have a group at all.
So I would like to propose using a sim
Thanks Carlos!
Seems that this has happened in more than one place (and is also strangely
the default behavior of my deploy - though when I do it with tapestry on the
same repo it doesn't even ask for my password as I've done the shared ssh
key thing ) .
Any chance you could chmod -R g+w everyth
On 13 Apr 07, at 11:33 AM 13 Apr 07, ArneD wrote:
Jason,
thanks a lot for your answer.
I did not want to suggest that every Maven user should be forced to
work
decoupled from repo1. But currently it is much harder than it
should be, and
this should be improved.
I agree. We really need
i just fixed the permissions, it was owned by jason with no group
perms, but as the directory is group writable you can delete them and
copy again, changing permissions
On 4/13/07, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While attempting to deploy the new 2.4 snapshot version of surefire I got
Jason,
thanks a lot for your answer.
I did not want to suggest that every Maven user should be forced to work
decoupled from repo1. But currently it is much harder than it should be, and
this should be improved. And I do agree that the separation of the Maven
core and the plugins has its benefit
On 4/13/07, ArneD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To adress these issues, may I suggest the following:
- Build Maven distributions that include a super POM that declares the
latest stable(!) version of all core Maven plugins (i.e. the plugins hosted
on maven.apache.org).
That won't work. You could
Actually, that is an interesting point, it could include that.
Enterprise is aimed more at the development cycle, but that could
easily include a "known stable and compatible with this toolset"
maven release.
Andy
On 13 Apr 2007, at 14:01, David Roussel wrote:
Hmm, that's a good idea. A
Results:
Binding: +4 (Brian,Luke,Stephane,Arnaud)
Nonbinding: + (Jerome)
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 3:40 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: [VOTE] maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-alpha-2
This release fixes just one critical
While attempting to deploy the new 2.4 snapshot version of surefire I got
somewhat far and then ran into a perm denied for one of the metadata files:
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO]
[INFO] Error installing artifact's metadata: Er
On 13 Apr 07, at 5:10 AM 13 Apr 07, ArneD wrote:
Hi everybody,
from a corporate user's point of view, I believe, the following
points are
important:
1. Corporate users want to be completely decoupled from what's
happening on
repo1.
No they don't. In my experience they have wanted to
+1
Stéphane
On 4/13/07, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I need 1 more PMC please.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerome Lacoste [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:07 AM
> To: Mave
+1
Arnaud
On 13/04/07, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I need 1 more PMC please.
-Original Message-
From: Jerome Lacoste [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:07 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-alpha-2
On 4/10/
+1
You still need one more though...
-Lukas
Brian E. Fox wrote:
I need 1 more PMC please.
-Original Message-
From: Jerome Lacoste [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:07 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-alpha-2
On
I need 1 more PMC please.
-Original Message-
From: Jerome Lacoste [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:07 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-alpha-2
On 4/10/07, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This release fixes j
Hmm, that's a good idea. A Maven distribution based on a given Maven
release. Is this like what "Maven Enterprise" will be?
John Casey wrote:
>
> Sure, my only point was that without this (and the standard packaging
> definitions) _nothing_ will work...it's just a gut-level uneasiness, not
>
1) my thought would be you don't have a mapping between the principal
and the user assignments in the rbac setup...if that principal isn't
the same between the two systems then your not going to have any
authorization credentials..
2) unless you have the authorization you don't get to see roles t
+1
- Joakim
Daniel Kulp wrote:
> I'd like to release version 1.0-alpha-5 of the
> maven-remote-resources-plugin. This resolves one critical bug, but
> also adds some new features to make it a bit more usable.
>
>
> Release Notes - Maven 2.x Remote Resources Plugin - Version 1.0-alpha-5
>
> **
+1
Emmanuel
Daniel Kulp a écrit :
I'd like to release version 1.0-alpha-5 of the
maven-remote-resources-plugin. This resolves one critical bug, but
also adds some new features to make it a bit more usable.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x Remote Resources Plugin - Version 1.0-alpha-5
** Bug
ping!
Niall
On 4/3/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3 Apr 07, at 1:39 PM 3 Apr 07, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that Maria has applied MSOURCES-14, can this release proceed?
>
I'll check it with the embedder and a few other projects before I
give it a thumbs up.
jason
+1
On 12 Apr 2007, at 18:13, Daniel Kulp wrote:
I'd like to release version 1.0-alpha-5 of the
maven-remote-resources-plugin. This resolves one critical bug, but
also adds some new features to make it a bit more usable.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x Remote Resources Plugin - Version 1.0-
alph
Hi everybody,
from a corporate user's point of view, I believe, the following points are
important:
1. Corporate users want to be completely decoupled from what's happening on
repo1. Many even don't want to proxy repo1 but instead manage their own
repository. This is especially true for build ar
56 matches
Mail list logo
