In general, I think that the default value should be whatever works in most
cases. Then we could have params for tweaking this (for better performance
e.g. in specific cases), but it would be up to the user to do this.
So, in this specific case, I think the default should be to recompress so
that i
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On 02/06/2013 05:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
>>
>
> The largest in this context would probably be:
>
> - annotation processors
>
I'm really vague on this, but wasn't there som
On Feb 7, 2013, at 19:28, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On 02/06/2013 05:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
>
> The largest in this context would probably be:
>
> - annotation processors
> - script engine
> - split bytecode verifier (thus quicker s
On 02/06/2013 05:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
The largest in this context would probably be:
- annotation processors
- script engine
- split bytecode verifier (thus quicker startup)
Java 7 is a bigger bump (NIO.2, try-with-resources
Hi Nigel.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Nigel Magnay wrote:
> >
> >
> > I am running Maven inside of Jenkins inside of WebSphere on AIX. I am
> > currently hosting Jenkins under WAS 6.1 on AIX 5.3. Whilst AIX 5.3 is
> > nearing (or may have reached it's EOS), WAS 6.1's EOS dates have *just
> b
+1000
Regards,
Hervé
Le jeudi 7 février 2013 11:46:52 Stephen Connolly a écrit :
[...]
> I am against moving up "just because". However I am all in favour of moving
> up "because XYZ".
>
> For me invalid reasons to move to as a runtime requirement 1.6 are things
> like:
>
> * I cannot get a 1.
Hi Stephen,
No, Java 1.6 is not available for AIX 5.3. It's support started as of 6.1.
Nicely worded on the good reasons.
The project that I'm working on now is upgrading everying, but even then,
we're only targeting 1.6, as that is what WAS/WPS/APS V8 all run on.
-Chris
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 a
Hello,
I agree with Nigel here, those who need to use an outdated version of the
JDK now have to use an outdated version of Maven as well. Testing stuff
with different JDK versions is work as well.
Stephen, I for one would love at least 1.6 for one single reason: having
@Override at interfaces :-
+1 (non-binding) tested with two multi-module projects (no new
features tested and I had no violations before anyway :-)).
Regards Mirko
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
> I'd like to release Maven Pmd Plugin 3.0.
> Note this version is based on PMD 5.0.2 (reason for th
Ok, just read it - it /is/ an option. That's all I care about ;).
Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2013 schrieb Andreas Gudian :
> I think I'd like to have the choice, i.e. I'd like an option for that.
>
>
> Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2013 schrieb Kristian Rosenvold :
>
>> A lot of you seemed to have rea
I think I'd like to have the choice, i.e. I'd like an option for that.
Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2013 schrieb Kristian Rosenvold :
> A lot of you seemed to have realized that the latest version of war and
> assembly have chosen the "fast" option over the "compact" option; and you
> actually seem
So... Make it Java 7!
Gary
On Feb 7, 2013, at 10:12, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
> I must say i am rather luke-warm about *ever* making 1.6 minimum. The few
> interesting things (functionally) that happened in 1.6 are well covered
> with reflection, and I'd be tempted to just wait until we can do
I must say i am rather luke-warm about *ever* making 1.6 minimum. The few
interesting things (functionally) that happened in 1.6 are well covered
with reflection, and I'd be tempted to just wait until we can do 1.7 base ;)
As for being able to support multiple versions, I generally make different
+1
Dan
On Feb 5, 2013, at 9:14 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
> I'd like to release Wagon 2.4.
>
> We fixed 5 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10335&version=18697
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-199/
>
>
>
> I am running Maven inside of Jenkins inside of WebSphere on AIX. I am
> currently hosting Jenkins under WAS 6.1 on AIX 5.3. Whilst AIX 5.3 is
> nearing (or may have reached it's EOS), WAS 6.1's EOS dates have *just been
> extended* by a year!
>
>
You know that Jenkins is looking like going Ja
+1 on Stephen's reasons
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 February 2013 08:58, Chris Graham wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On 07/02/2013, at 6:59 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> >
> > > Le 7 févr. 2013 04:54
On 7 February 2013 08:58, Chris Graham wrote:
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 07/02/2013, at 6:59 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
>
> > Le 7 févr. 2013 04:54, "Chris Graham" a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hey All.
> >>
> >> Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
> >>
> >> Whilst
On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:00, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> Le 7 févr. 2013 04:54, "Chris Graham" a écrit :
>>
>> Hey All.
>>
>> Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
>>
>> Whilst I understand the desire for developers to play with something shiny
>> and new,
>
> Please. Can
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Struberg"
> To: "Maven Developers List"
> Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2013 12:23:39 AM
> Subject: Re: EOL of 1.5 as minimum
>
>
>
> What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
That's easy to answer for some people. There is no worki
+1
I missed to say website available here:
http://maven.apache.org/wagon-archives/wagon-LATEST/
2013/2/5 Olivier Lamy :
> Hi,
> I'd like to release Wagon 2.4.
>
> We fixed 5 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10335&version=18697
>
> Staging repository:
> https://
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven Pmd Plugin 3.0.
Note this version is based on PMD 5.0.2 (reason for the version bump).
We fixed 18 issues:
https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MPMD+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DES
Sent from my iPhone
On 07/02/2013, at 6:59 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> Le 7 févr. 2013 04:54, "Chris Graham" a écrit :
>>
>> Hey All.
>>
>> Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
>>
>> Whilst I understand the desire for developers to play with something shiny
2013/2/7 Stephen Connolly :
> On Thursday, 7 February 2013, Nicolas Delsaux wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Olivier Lamy >
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about that (again).
>> >
>> > Reading [1], even 1.6 won't be anymore updated after feb 20
On Thursday, 7 February 2013, Nicolas Delsaux wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Olivier Lamy >
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about that (again).
> >
> > Reading [1], even 1.6 won't be anymore updated after feb 2013.
> >
> > Can we say we are safe to
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
> As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about that (again).
>
> Reading [1], even 1.6 won't be anymore updated after feb 2013.
>
> Can we say we are safe to go to 1.6 as minimum required ?
>
Don't fully understand the question.
Le 7 févr. 2013 04:54, "Chris Graham" a écrit :
>
> Hey All.
>
> Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
>
> Whilst I understand the desire for developers to play with something shiny
> and new,
Please. Can we stop using that kind of father-ish formulation? That's not
26 matches
Mail list logo
