This is pretty messed up. If I build the harness locally, it works ok. I
moved some of the stubs from mdep up to the harness, built and
redeployed the harness snapshot. All is fine in mdep. Then when maven
decides the snapshot I deployed is newer than the one in my local repo,
suddenly the tests st
On 29 Jun 07, at 1:00 PM 29 Jun 07, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Sorry, but I've been totally swamped at work. Anyway, there is now
a little Swizzle script that creates a text report for this:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/sandbox/trunk/shared/reports/
mng-votes-per-version.vm
java -jar
Raphael already has a CLA on file, so there's no rush.
I'll take another look on Monday and vote then, I have other things
to do this weekend.
- Brett
On 30/06/2007, at 12:40 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Great, that's 4 PMC members already so people can continue to
comment but I'll get Raphae
I think the extension points need to be configured by the pom, so
that projects build consistently on any installation. I continue to
think the 'build the project' POM is different to the 'represent the
project' POM that winds up in the repository and other places and
should be separated at
Sorry, but I've been totally swamped at work. Anyway, there is now a
little Swizzle script that creates a text report for this:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/sandbox/trunk/shared/reports/mng-votes-per-version.vm
java -jar swizzle-jirareport-1.2.1-SNAPSHOT-dep.jar
mng-votes-per-version.
That makes sense. I don't use this much myself, but I was concerned
that it may pop up as an inconsistency in Mavenland. It's a good
point to remember that we're not dealing with strictly Maven users,
though.
-john
On Jun 28, 2007, at 4:53 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 28 Jun 07, at 1:33
Le vendredi 29 juin 2007, Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit :
> patch MANTTASKS-76_site-release.diff added to MANTTASKS-76
added patch MANTTASKS-76_license.diff too, while we're at it...
>
> Ready for the release!
>
> Hervé
>
> Le jeudi 28 juin 2007, Jason van Zyl a écrit :
> > On 28 Jun 07, at 1:54 PM 28 Jun
+1 (non-binding)
tested at work under real life conditions
Hervé
Le jeudi 28 juin 2007, Jason van Zyl a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Repost of the vote after fixing the issues with the uber JAR that was
> produced. Hervé and I have tried them and they appear to work fine.
>
> The staging repository is here:
patch MANTTASKS-76_site-release.diff added to MANTTASKS-76
Ready for the release!
Hervé
Le jeudi 28 juin 2007, Jason van Zyl a écrit :
> On 28 Jun 07, at 1:54 PM 28 Jun 07, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> > Le jeudi 28 juin 2007, Jason van Zyl a écrit :
> >> Thanks Herve, I forgot about adding that even
Hi,
Just some thoughts here.
Maven can be customized with plugins. That is, the build currently is,
but what is the build? It seems dependency resolution is not part of it.
What about we extend the a bit, like this:
this way you can customize whatever components
+1
-Original Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 2:29 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: [VOTE] Migrate ArchetypeNG to Apache & commit privs for Raphael
Hi,
After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code new
by defau
Yup; I was using 2.0-beta-6 and looking for open JIRA issues. Maybe I
should learn to search better ;o)
Thanks!
On 6/29/07, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 28/06/07, Patrick Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> Is there anything special that needs to happen for the
>
+1 and another, very cool
On 6/29/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Great, that's 4 PMC members already so people can continue to comment
but I'll get Raphael to send in a CLA, and adjust the code for Apache.
On 28 Jun 07, at 11:28 PM 28 Jun 07, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After
Great, that's 4 PMC members already so people can continue to comment
but I'll get Raphael to send in a CLA, and adjust the code for Apache.
On 28 Jun 07, at 11:28 PM 28 Jun 07, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code
new by default will
Put it in the wiki.
On 29 Jun 07, at 3:28 AM 29 Jun 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 28/06/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As long as you track this in your proposal and end result amounts to
what this is going to look like in a v4 POM in 2.1 where hopefully
we'll have something nicer li
On 29 Jun 07, at 1:57 AM 29 Jun 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 28/06/07, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 28/06/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One nitpick is that I think we should stick to property names that
> follow Java variable name conventions like mavenConflictResolv
+1
Arnaud
On 29/06/07, Andrew Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 good plan,
Andy
On 29 Jun 2007, at 07:28, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code
> new by default will produce a functional archetype without user
> intervention, a
+1 for both.
Thanks,
Stéphane
On 6/29/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code
new by default will produce a functional archetype without user
intervention, and projects can be generated with the old and new
archetype p
+1 good plan,
Andy
On 29 Jun 2007, at 07:28, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code
new by default will produce a functional archetype without user
intervention, and projects can be generated with the old and new
archetype plugins. I
+1 on both counts.
-john
On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:28 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
After a fews weeks of sorting out some niggly details the new code
new by default will produce a functional archetype without user
intervention, and projects can be generated with the old and new
archetype p
On 28/06/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As long as you track this in your proposal and end result amounts to
what this is going to look like in a v4 POM in 2.1 where hopefully
we'll have something nicer like:
x
y
z
And then in 2.1 if these strategies are employed we can
On 28/06/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29/06/2007, at 2:35 AM, Mark Hobson wrote:
> I'll write an IT tomorrow than demonstrates this behaviour, but it's
> pretty easy to try out.
Neat!
Added it0125 to verify switching to newest-wins conflict resolution.
Mark
Hi there,
I am the author of the maven-antlr3-plugin, which Vincent Siveton kindly
added to the Maven sandbox recently:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/sandbox/trunk/plugins/maven-antlr3-plugin/
I would like to update the documentation a bit and do a release from the
newly Apache-brande
On 28/06/07, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 28/06/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One nitpick is that I think we should stick to property names that
> follow Java variable name conventions like mavenConflictResolvers,
> and this also prevents any screw ups with any ELs o
On 28/06/07, Patrick Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howdy,
Is there anything special that needs to happen for the
section to get written out when using generateReleasePoms and version
ranges? I'm getting everything *but* the section written
out. Simple hello world project; one dep on c
25 matches
Mail list logo
