Re: [VOTE] Apache 3.1.0-alpha-1 (Take 4)

+1 (non-binding) for (c726cdd3a9ad5c3a419e1171f8c1925e336ead18): - I successfully ran mvn verify site for some of my own projects (pom-only, one jar, multi-module). - the current trunk of maven-javadoc-plugin encountered some failing ITs. [ERROR] * additionnal-dependencies-non-aggregate/pom.xml [

Re: Strategy for jmod (Jigsaw)?

Hi Jesse, Am 20.05.2013 17:28, schrieb Jesse Glick: On 05/16/2013 05:42 PM, Jörg Hohwiller wrote: is there already some slight inital draft or idea for a strategy how maven x.y could deal with jigsaw? I wrote up a very preliminary sketch about a year ago [1] but have not worked on it since t

Re: CALL TO CONTRIBUTION: dist tooling

pfew, really nice! It would be nice if reports started by an explanation of points checked: that would ease understanding the content following, because dist-tool-checkstyle report in particular is hard to understand ("check summary", "Stylus Skin"?, "Fluido Skin"?) But it is really a wonderfu

RE: CALL TO CONTRIBUTION: dist tooling

I need some feedback on informations to display. I propose my (limited) vision. mvn clean install site http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/sandbox/trunk/dist-tools database of artifacts to check is not complete, loosely based on artifacts plugins from http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/p

[VOTE] Apache 3.1.0-alpha-1 (Take 4)

Here are the release bits for 3.1.0-alpha-1: Release notes: https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&version=18967 Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-046/ Staged distribution: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ma

Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?

from a pure technical perspective, yes: a release is a release but from recent experience, making such difference between pre-releases and actual releases could give us some flexibility without much disturbance from my experience, even if this question is not absolutely scm-specific, git brings

Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?

:-) I use a 4 digit no, but I have special requirements. X.Y.Z.N-SNAPSHOT etc. -Chris On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Mirko Friedenhagen wrote: > And btw. even SNAPSHOTs are nowadays deployed with a timestamp and so more > easily identifiable. I like James approach x.y.z-candidate but would be

Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?

>but as I see, there seems to be a consensus around a 2-sided rule: >- don't reuse version number for pre-releases (RC, etc) >- reuse version number for actual releases Not sure how I feel about that. alpha/beta/RCx etc, they are all still valid version nos, so I think that the no re-spin rule sh

Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?

yes, the vote for one unique rule is clearly "-1" but as I see, there seems to be a consensus around a 2-sided rule: - don't reuse version number for pre-releases (RC, etc) - reuse version number for actual releases Regards, Hervé Le samedi 1 juin 2013 08:27:38 Stephen Connolly a écrit : > I wi

Re: [VOTE] Apache 3.1.0-alpha-1

ok, the auto installer ant_maven.groovy script gets every released Maven version from our official release area [1] Then *any released* version will be available: once Maven 3.1.0-alpha-1 will be released, it will be shown by this script, ready to have many eyes, even if this release is only al

Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?

I will need to recheck the tally, but I think the result is -3 So looks like we will be reusing version numbers on respins On Wednesday, 29 May 2013, Stephen Connolly wrote: > We have been using a policy of only making releases without skipping > version numbers, e.g. > > 3.0.0, 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.