RE: Java version for 2.1 branch

> Is there any reason that the 2.1 branch cannot require java > 1.5 to compile and execute? I am not a developer on Maven, so my vote would not count anyway. I am an independent IT consultant and want to offer some background information why this would be a "bad" decision. During my work for th

Re: [Proposal] Securing passwords in settings.xml

Sure, that would be great! ;-) (I posted a comment on the page, btw..) Thanks, Deng On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Oleg Gusakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > Maria - I described what I did on that page. If it's interesting - I can > help with the project - really like this stuff :) > > Thanks

Re: no commit email for surefire

I think that makes sense - much like release, enforcer, etc. that don't need separate lists. It'd be worth deciding on a separate plugin list first since it would move there instead... so far that seems to be no objections, but no real push and a bit of maybe later :) Would also need to c

Re: Java version for 2.1 branch

+1 Arnaud On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1D > > > On 17/08/2008, at 6:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Is there any reason that the 2.1 branch cannot require java 1.5 to compile >> and execute? >> >> Ralph >> >> -

Re: [WARNING] Continuous integration for plugins is unusable

Done thanks. Should we open an issue for this ? I don't remember to have already see it. On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Remove the project-info-reports plugin for now. We should probably look at > scope while building up the directed graph and not wor

Re: Java version for 2.1 branch

+1D On 17/08/2008, at 6:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: Is there any reason that the 2.1 branch cannot require java 1.5 to compile and execute? Ralph - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [E

Re: [WARNING] Continuous integration for plugins is unusable

Remove the project-info-reports plugin for now. We should probably look at scope while building up the directed graph and not worry about cycles in test dependencies. On 17-Aug-08, at 1:40 PM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote: Without reply I suppose the only thing to do is : to wait ... On Wed, Aug

Re: [WARNING] Continuous integration for plugins is unusable

Without reply I suppose the only thing to do is : to wait ... On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Arnaud HERITIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi all, > > Don't know if you noticed that plugins builds on CI server (and locally) > are KO for several days : > > https://ci.sonatype.org/view/Plugins/j

Re: Java version for 2.1 branch

At this point I don't see why not. It's a major version bump, and we've seen from most feedback running a 1.5 JVM doesn't appear to be a problem for anyone. +1 On 17-Aug-08, at 1:27 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: Is there any reason that the 2.1 branch cannot require java 1.5 to compile and execu

add branchBase optional parameter for release:branch goal

Hi all, I've created a patch for having a branchBase option for maven release plugin branch goal. Should be a parallel to tagBase during prepare and release goals. This would make branching more flexible as regards the location of where the branch would be placed. Hope someone can give it a look:

Re: Please close the MCLOVER project on codehaus

Hi Nick, On Aug 3, 2008, at 9:37 AM, Nick Pellow wrote: Hi Vincent, I just noticed that some users of the maven-clover2-plugin are still raising issues against the JIRA instance located at: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCLOVER Ok I've modified the permissions to that the project is clo

Java version for 2.1 branch

Is there any reason that the 2.1 branch cannot require java 1.5 to compile and execute? Ralph - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]