On 15-Dec-08, at 10:38 PM, Chris Maki wrote:
On Dec 15, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I was only rejoicing for Maven 3.x because it's been a long time
coming.
But we'll gradually build up what I hope is a hallmark of best
practices for CI. Integration tests running with coverag
On Dec 15, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I was only rejoicing for Maven 3.x because it's been a long time
coming.
But we'll gradually build up what I hope is a hallmark of best
practices for CI. Integration tests running with coverage, real time
feedback. We may need to write cu
On 16/12/2008, at 11:04 AM, ogusa...@apache.org wrote:
Author: ogusakov
Date: Mon Dec 15 16:04:14 2008
New Revision: 726880
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=726880&view=rev
Log:
[MERCURY-56] verification configuration for mercury ant tasks done,
PGP unit test works on osx. Need test key
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> In eclipse that's true, it's a fallback.
The reason I ask is that m-e-p will list "Javadoc for some artifacts
is not available." if you have not set downloadJavadocs=true even
though the source artifact is available.
I'm contemplating chang
I was only rejoicing for Maven 3.x because it's been a long time coming.
But we'll gradually build up what I hope is a hallmark of best
practices for CI. Integration tests running with coverage, real time
feedback. We may need to write custom plugins for Hudson but we'll get
it done.
On 1
Howdy,
This is primarily directed at Benjamin (who has done a great job
getting the ITs in shape), John (who has spent a great deal of time
getting our grid up and running), and Tom (who has made some very cool
additions to Hudson which we will leverage for Maven).
Today we started being
In eclipse that's true, it's a fallback.
-Original Message-
From: Barrie Treloar [mailto:baerr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 6:21 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: m-eclipse-p: attaching both sources and javadocs?
Does it make sense to attach javadocs if the source is
Does it make sense to attach javadocs if the source is available?
I thought that javadoc could be accessed through the source.
Which means its an unnecessary download of the javadocs.
Thoughts?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsu
Hi Dennis,
I renamed branches, did an external on the branches, updated some poms.
I leave you Jira and the 1.0 release.
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/12/14 Vincent Siveton :
> Hi Dennis,
>
>> 2. Rename
>> http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/doxia/doxia-sitetools/branches/doxia-sitetools-1.0-alpha-
Thanks, I'll take a look. I'm interested in finally continuing the
work I started on a terse POM syntax earlier in the year and can start
by spec'ing out the interoperability needs.
On 16/12/2008, at 7:02 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph b
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 7:29 AM, John Casey wrote:
> Actually, 2.1.x and 2.0.x are both building out on
> https://grid.sonatype.com/ci/ already.
excellent
Now for related projects and deploying these to a snapshot repo and I
will be a happy man.
-
Actually, 2.1.x and 2.0.x are both building out on
https://grid.sonatype.com/ci/ already.
Barrie Treloar wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Howdy,
We now have the CI for Maven 3.x working across Ubuntu, CentOS, OS X,
Windows (Vista), and Solaris. This is a small vic
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> We now have the CI for Maven 3.x working across Ubuntu, CentOS, OS X,
> Windows (Vista), and Solaris. This is a small victory and from here the
> system is just going to be improved. John Casey has spent a _long_ time
> getting thi
This is for the general population but I'm nudging you Ralph because I
know that you want to make some changes for not requiring the version
in the parent element.
I don't think I'll be too keen on making substantive changes to how
the POM is constructed until alpha-3/4 (because we need to
Howdy,
We now have the CI for Maven 3.x working across Ubuntu, CentOS, OS X,
Windows (Vista), and Solaris. This is a small victory and from here
the system is just going to be improved. John Casey has spent a _long_
time getting this grid setup and is going to dovetail into all the
work t
Small test case attached.
install order is rule,base then project.
/James
> -Original Message-
> From: Nord, James [mailto:jn...@nds.com]
> Sent: 15 December 2008 10:39
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: Maven enforcer issues.
>
> I have a large reproducable test case :-)
>
>
On 15-Dec-08, at 12:55 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
=
=
--- maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml (original)
+++ maven/components/trunk/maven-core/pom.xml Sun Dec 14 11:51:59
2008
@@ -111,8 +111,8 @@
${project.version}
This isn't the entire reactor, but the getClasspathElements()
method. The only situation I can think of this breaking is:
* someone trying to pull apart the classpath looking for directories
and doing something special with them (which would be a horrible
abuse of the method's contract)
I think before the alpha-1 I don't think everyone is interested in
getting spammed, but once the release is cut the goal is to keep the
build on the grid machines in a perpetual working state so standard
notification at that point should be fine.
On 14-Dec-08, at 8:53 PM, Brett Porter wrote
Hi Barrie,
2008/12/14 Barrie Treloar :
> After reading the recent post for "New namespaces for Maven Settings
> and Profiles XSD" I went to update my assembly xml files.
>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/assembly.html
> doesn't list what version it uses and http://maven.apa
I have a large reproducable test case :-)
I'll try and shrink it to the bare minimum.
/James
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:br...@apache.org]
> Sent: 14 December 2008 11:37
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Maven enforcer issues.
>
> Off the top of my head
Brett,
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter
> Sent: maandag 15 december 2008 9:50
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: BUG? Profile properties not used to resolve
> dependencies transitively. (was RE: Version property in root
> POM & multi-level dependency resolution)
>
>
>
2008/12/15 Brett Porter
>
> On 12/12/2008, at 6:57 AM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 3:51 AM, Brian E. Fox
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think most of these ideas are already covered in the lifecycle
>>> proposal out there that john wrote.
>>>
>>
>> Can you paste the link in please?
>>
On 15/12/2008, at 7:44 PM, De Smet Ringo wrote:
Brett,
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter
Sent: donderdag 11 december 2008 17:23
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: BUG? Profile properties not used to resolve
dependencies transitively. (was RE: Version property in root
POM & mul
Brett,
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter
> Sent: donderdag 11 december 2008 17:23
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: BUG? Profile properties not used to resolve
> dependencies transitively. (was RE: Version property in root
> POM & multi-level dependency resolution)
>
>
25 matches
Mail list logo
