Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Hervé BOUTEMY
some more personal thoughts and questions to make myself an opinion - about determining whether Aether API is biased or not: there was an argument for not developing Aether in Maven that was "Aether API will be more generic to cover other dependency resolution mecanisms and repository formats, l

Re: [VOTE] formally end support for Maven 1

2013-03-03 Thread Lukas Theussl
+1 (not binding) -Lukas Benson Margulies wrote: Based on the sentiment on the discussion thread, I call a formal vote to end support for Maven 1.x. This is a vote to: 1: Remove maven 1 release materials from the primary distribution area, leaving them only on the archive. 2: Make appropriat

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Stephane Nicoll
Same here. On Sunday, March 3, 2013, Benson Margulies wrote: > As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the > tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether. > > I would rather see us use the version number to communicate with the > vast number of peopl

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
To me I would like to roll in all of it, I think the bump in major version is appropriate but if we call that 3.1.0 that's fine. It really does work almost the same, there are some plugins that will get need some rework but that's not the end of the world. To me a plugin that works in 3.0.x but

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Benson Margulies
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the >> tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether. >> > > Any JSR330 discrepancies, SLF4J bein

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Mar 3, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the > tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether. > Any JSR330 discrepancies, SLF4J being used for logging and the Aether changes. 4.0.0 says "we did

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
Stephen, It doesn't matter where the code is. It's complicated, takes a lot of effort to understand and I don't really care, or see it as a problem that Benjamin is the one who works on it most. No one else worked on here, no one else is working on it there. It's not where it is, it's that it's

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Benson Margulies
> Well I agree with Semantic Versioning, so the question here that dictates > 3.2 vs 4.0 is whether we see Sonatype Aether as part of the exposed > supported API of Maven. IIRC the stated position is that plugin authors are > not supposed to rely on the Sonatype Aether API. If plugin authors have >

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Stephen Connolly
On 3 March 2013 22:41, Benson Margulies wrote: > As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the > tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether. > > I would rather see us use the version number to communicate with the > vast number of people who use Mave

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Stephen Connolly
On 3 March 2013 14:16, Jason van Zyl wrote: > Hi, > > No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without > the isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse > Aether and suggest an alternate release path. > > SLF4J may cause some issues, but the int

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Benson Margulies
As I see it, you are using the version number to communicate with the tiny number of people who have made plugins that depend on Aether. I would rather see us use the version number to communicate with the vast number of people who use Maven. So, I'd switch to Eclipse Aether, including the need t

Re: [VOTE] formally end support for Maven 1

2013-03-03 Thread Brett Porter
+1 On 03/03/2013, at 2:18 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > Based on the sentiment on the discussion thread, I call a formal vote > to end support for Maven 1.x. This is a vote to: > > 1: Remove maven 1 release materials from the primary distribution > area, leaving them only on the archive. > > 2

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Mar 3, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Mark Derricutt wrote: > A quick answer whilst I let my thoughts dwell on the full long post.. > > If we're jumping to a major release here, is this a viable time to also > update the schema and address of the things we've long been wanting there? ( > mixins of some

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Mar 3, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Stuart McCulloch wrote: > On 3 Mar 2013, at 14:16, Jason van Zyl wrote: >> Hi, >> >> No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without the >> isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse >> Aether and suggest an alt

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Stuart McCulloch
On 3 Mar 2013, at 14:16, Jason van Zyl wrote: > Hi, > > No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without the > isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse > Aether and suggest an alternate release path. > > SLF4J may cause some issues, but the

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Changes Plugin version 2.9

2013-03-03 Thread Mirko Friedenhagen
+0.5 (non-binding) the documentation at http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-changes-plugin-2.9/announcement-generate-mojo.html#issueManagementSystems does not list GitHub (or Trac) as valid system. So I had to configure the changes-plugin to explicitly use GitHub although this is the onl

Re: The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Mark Derricutt
A quick answer whilst I let my thoughts dwell on the full long post.. If we're jumping to a major release here, is this a viable time to also update the schema and address of the things we've long been wanting there? ( mixins of some form ) - or is this out of scope ( of this discussion at lea

Re: [VOTE] formally end support for Maven 1

2013-03-03 Thread Karl Heinz Marbaise
+1 (non binding). Kind regards Karl-Heinz Marbaise -- SoftwareEntwicklung Beratung SchulungTel.: +49 (0) 2405 / 415 893 Dipl.Ing.(FH) Karl-Heinz MarbaiseICQ#: 135949029 Hauptstrasse 177 USt.IdNr: DE191347579 52146 Würselen http://www.s

Re: [VOTE] formally end support for Maven 1

2013-03-03 Thread Brian Fox
+1 On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > +1 > > Regards, > > Hervé > > Le samedi 2 mars 2013 07:18:51 Benson Margulies a écrit : > > Based on the sentiment on the discussion thread, I call a formal vote > > to end support for Maven 1.x. This is a vote to: > > > > 1: Remove mave

The next major release of Maven: 4.0.0

2013-03-03 Thread Jason van Zyl
Hi, No one seems to object to doing a release with the SLF4J support without the isolation so I wanted to discuss what happens when we integrate Eclipse Aether and suggest an alternate release path. SLF4J may cause some issues, but the introduction of Eclipse Aether is almost certainly going t

Re: [VOTE] formally end support for Maven 1

2013-03-03 Thread Hervé BOUTEMY
+1 Regards, Hervé Le samedi 2 mars 2013 07:18:51 Benson Margulies a écrit : > Based on the sentiment on the discussion thread, I call a formal vote > to end support for Maven 1.x. This is a vote to: > > 1: Remove maven 1 release materials from the primary distribution > area, leaving them only