I'll get it up on our Jenkins but here's a run that shows it passes:
http://ci.tesla.io:8080/job/maven-its-logback/jdk=jdk-1.6/20/
On Dec 17, 2012, at 12:35 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> On 17 December 2012 17:28, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/17 Stephen Connolly :
>>> Now the above could
Yup, the logback stuff all passes. The grid has been a bit wonky but I'll put a
job up there.
On Dec 17, 2012, at 12:35 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> On 17 December 2012 17:28, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> 2012/12/17 Stephen Connolly :
>>> Now the above could be fixed... but *somebody* needs to
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> And what about working on real improvements for users ?
I don't follow. I sent an email that attempts to bring this debate to
a close so that, in fact, we can get a release out and get on with
other projects, of which all of the below are goo
Which, from my point of view, proves our failure.
A user should never have to use maven in debug to understand its project
dependencies.
dependency:tree, list, analyze should be our first calls mojo to help users
to sanitize their dependencies and to better understand the how maven is
doing the res
Personally I find "-X dependency:tree" -way- more useful. Half the time
when I'm trying to track down dependency problems maven itself fails to
fully resolve dependencies and crashes out the mojo without displaying
anything useful, so you end up looking though the debug information to
find whi
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Olivier Lamy, Robert Scholte, Hervé BOUTEMY
+1 (non binding): Mirko Friedenhagen, Tony Chemit
I will promote the artifacts to the central repo.
thanks,
Robert
Op Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:48:24 +0100 schreef Robert Scholte
:
Hi
On 17 December 2012 17:28, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/12/17 Stephen Connolly :
> > Now the above could be fixed... but *somebody* needs to write some code
> to
> > make them fixed. In the absence of anyone writing such code and
> committing
> > it, those branches are dead... as are those choices.
2012/12/17 Stephen Connolly :
> On 17 December 2012 15:07, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> Sorry Stephen, I find this comparison unfair.
>>
>
>
> Mark, here is my point.
>
> To move forward on the logging over slf4j plan (A plan you are against, and
> I have not seen any one else support your cause) we
On 17 December 2012 15:07, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Sorry Stephen, I find this comparison unfair.
>
Mark, here is my point.
To move forward on the logging over slf4j plan (A plan you are against, and
I have not seen any one else support your cause) we need to pick an
implementation.
Initially J
Sorry Stephen, I find this comparison unfair.
Please look how much code has been written and is necessary to get slf4j (and
any other non MojoLogger impl) really running. And for making it fully work it
will need even more work because we first need to ship all plugins with an
upgraded maven-pl
On 17 December 2012 14:46, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> And what about working on real improvements for users ?
>
> I see:
> * incremental build
> * fixing various bugs on dependency plugin (tree doesn't work well
> since aether: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MDEP-392) or this very
> old one (https://
+100
i really think "maven is bad" sentences we sometimes hear doesn't
reference the logging at all so probably not something where time
should be lost
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github:
And what about working on real improvements for users ?
I see:
* incremental build
* fixing various bugs on dependency plugin (tree doesn't work well
since aether: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MDEP-392) or this very
old one (https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MDEP-187) which have 50
votes. And IM
13 matches
Mail list logo
