On 23/08/2007, at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
One of the advantages of what you were describing is the ability
to not install anything unless the entire build passes - that has
some virtues as well, but I consider it a separate feature to
fixing the local repository concurrency proble
Brett Porter wrote:
On 23/08/2007, at 7:12 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Or a better local repository model ;-)
+1. I already started to draft a proposal for the wiki on this, but
hadn't posted it yet.
One where there are two local repositories (committed and current
build) that get laye
I would like you to ask for your opinion about MNG-2871:
The problem could be called "internal dependencies" in reactor when
everything is build by phase lower then "package". The real
jar's for such a dependencies like client-jar or test-jar are created
and attached to original artifacts in "pack
We're currently serializing the builds to avoid this, although I'd like
to parallelize them (3 cores idle). I guess we could isolate each build
to a separate local repo, but that would be a huge amount of disk used
up since most of the builds are also referencing the others, and I have
too many to
On 23/08/2007, at 7:12 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Or a better local repository model ;-)
+1. I already started to draft a proposal for the wiki on this, but
hadn't posted it yet.
One where there are two local repositories (committed and current
build) that get layered together.
Wha
Hi,
It is a plexus error. Do someone has a clue?
Moreover, the default reply for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
should be only [EMAIL PROTECTED], not both.
Cheers,
Vincent
7/8/22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Online report :
> http://maven.zones.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=
File a Jira and I'll see what I can do. I wish the resolver had a nice
interface so I could just ask for a resolved artifact and get the same
behavior as core. I have to keep reimplementing a bunch of stuff.
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesd
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 22 Aug 07, at 1:28 PM 22 Aug 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local repository?
Simultaneous builds in a CI system on a multicore machine.
If you are knowingly doing this then I would say different settings
via a build
On 22 Aug 07, at 1:28 PM 22 Aug 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local
repository?
Simultaneous builds in a CI system on a multicore machine.
If you are knowingly doing this then I would say different settings
via a build plan to prevent cor
Here are the results of this vote:
+1: Dennis Lundberg, Brett Porter, Arnaud Heritier
I'll move this release to the central repo.
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to release maven-model-converter 2.2. A bunch of fixes and
improvements have gone into it since the last release. A stable rel
Brett Porter wrote:
On 16/08/2007, at 8:42 AM, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Or is there something that we can do in doxia to fix it? Should we
update to a version of plexus-velocity that uses the latest
plexus-container-default?
That would work; or add a depMgt section specifying p-c-d and p-c
Brian E. Fox wrote:
One big issue I have is that the maven-dependency-plugin seems to
ignore
artifacts produced in the current build execution and only pulls from
the local repository... so I have to run "mvn install" all the time...
Which goal? The unpack, copy yes, but unpack/c
>One big issue I have is that the maven-dependency-plugin seems to
ignore
>artifacts produced in the current build execution and only pulls from
>the local repository... so I have to run "mvn install" all the time...
Which goal? The unpack, copy yes, but unpack/copy-dependencies will work
with p
>How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local repository?
Simultaneous builds in a CI system on a multicore machine.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sounds ok to me. We'll import to the sandbox anyway and make sure we are
essentially read to cut a first release before we replace the trunk. It would
make sense to make this a new version of the archetype and make the current one
a separate branch if needed.
-Original Message-
From: [E
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 21 Aug 07, at 6:05 PM 21 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
To date, I have always been in favour of one trunk, and one version.
I understand the need for a clear separate and for Doxia to be useful
without the site tools, but I don't think separating the releases was
the r
On 22 Aug 07, at 12:42 PM 22 Aug 07, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 22 Aug 07, at 11:29 AM 22 Aug 07, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Gregory Kick wrote:
How do you deal with concurrent writes?
That's a nightmare problem with the local repository anyway.
How on earth do you
On 8/22/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 22 Aug 07, at 11:23 AM 22 Aug 07, Gregory Kick wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >> It does if you use a shared file system, many people actually use
> >> this. And simple Window file perms work here to protect it.
> >
> > How do you deal with concurren
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 22 Aug 07, at 11:29 AM 22 Aug 07, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Gregory Kick wrote:
How do you deal with concurrent writes?
That's a nightmare problem with the local repository anyway.
How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local repository?
That's easy
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 22 Aug 07, at 11:29 AM 22 Aug 07, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Gregory Kick wrote:
How do you deal with concurrent writes?
That's a nightmare problem with the local repository anyway.
How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local repository?
One team of
On 22 Aug 07, at 11:29 AM 22 Aug 07, Stephen Connolly wrote:
Gregory Kick wrote:
How do you deal with concurrent writes?
That's a nightmare problem with the local repository anyway.
How on earth do you have concurrency problems with a local repository?
One team of ours had to scrap swit
On 22 Aug 07, at 11:23 AM 22 Aug 07, Gregory Kick wrote:
It does if you use a shared file system, many people actually use
this. And simple Window file perms work here to protect it.
How do you deal with concurrent writes?
There's nothing you can do here with Wagon in general right now.
Gregory Kick wrote:
On 8/22/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 22 Aug 07, at 8:24 AM 22 Aug 07, Gregory Kick wrote:
Ok, so I'm coming to the conversation slightly late in the game, but
all of this discussion reminds me of something that's been in the back
of my mind for so
On 8/22/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 22 Aug 07, at 8:24 AM 22 Aug 07, Gregory Kick wrote:
>
> > Ok, so I'm coming to the conversation slightly late in the game, but
> > all of this discussion reminds me of something that's been in the back
> > of my mind for sometime. With a
On 22 Aug 07, at 8:24 AM 22 Aug 07, Gregory Kick wrote:
Ok, so I'm coming to the conversation slightly late in the game, but
all of this discussion reminds me of something that's been in the back
of my mind for sometime. With all of the effort put forth in the
various repository managers, fron
Ok, so I'm coming to the conversation slightly late in the game, but
all of this discussion reminds me of something that's been in the back
of my mind for sometime. With all of the effort put forth in the
various repository managers, front-ends, proxies, mirrors, etc. why
doesn't the whole reposit
I'd like to release a 1.0-alpha-5 of the plugin before the other code
comes in to get some bugfixes out
is there a requirement to release all modules or just the plugin is ok?
I'll call a vote later today
On 8/22/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 22/08/2007, at 11:34 PM, Jason va
Emmanuel is on holidays at the moment, so I'll wrap this up.
There have been 10 affirmative votes, so welcome Olivier!
I'll follow up separately about getting a CLA, etc.
Cheers,
Brett
On 13/08/2007, at 7:06 PM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to give to Olivier commit access to Contin
On 22/08/2007, at 11:34 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Brian and I are teaming up with Raphaël to get everything moved
over. Brian wants to learn the IP clearance part, and is helping
Raphaël with some code and testing, and then any of the code
movement I will take care of.
I was going to put
On 21 Aug 07, at 8:49 PM 21 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 22/08/2007, at 1:10 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much
easier.
I'm really not in favour of this. Isn't the inv
Brian and I are teaming up with Raphaël to get everything moved over.
Brian wants to learn the IP clearance part, and is helping Raphaël
with some code and testing, and then any of the code movement I will
take care of.
I was going to put the code into a branch, where did the sandbox
requ
+1.
--
Olivier
-Message d'origine-
De : Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : mardi 21 août 2007 04:38
À : Maven Developers List
Objet : [vote] adopt Continuum instance on zone as part of the project
infrastructure
Hi,
Continuum has been running on the zone for a while. Some
You're right, the ear packaging lifecycle is not meant to support this
currently. The problem with that is the definition is tied to Maven
itself so it's hard to change it.
Please open an issue in the MNG project with the details.
Thanks,
Stéphane
On 8/22/07, Nathaniel Stoddard <[EMAIL PROTECTED
33 matches
Mail list logo
