The split verifier should improve cli performance once core and most
plugins are on -target 1.6
Any committer is free to call a vote to up the minimum to 1.7 if they want
to.
>From a build tool perspective there are some advantages in 1.6 as a
baseline (compiler api, scripting api, split verifier
+1
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Dennis Lundberg
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the final release of this plugin. After this release it will
> be retired, see separate vote thread for more info on that.
>
> We solved 1 issue:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11135&styl
+1
2013/7/24 Dennis Lundberg :
> Hi,
>
> This is the final release of this plugin. After this release it will
> be retired, see separate vote thread for more info on that.
>
> We solved 1 issue:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11135&styleName=Html&version=14478
>
> The
+1
2013/7/24 Dennis Lundberg :
> Hi,
>
> This will be the final release of this shared component. After this
> release it will retire from the Apache Maven project and move to the
> Apache Archiva project. See separate vote thread about that.
>
> We solved 6 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secu
Am 07/24/13 04:00, schrieb jieryn:
>
> Move forward or die. If you are stuck on 1.5, you can continue to use
> a full stack that is already supported. I am so sick of hearing people
> complain that they will be broken if a JDK migration to a newer
> version is undertaken. No, you are not broken, y
Greetings,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
> Why change '-target 1.5' to '-target 1.6' without any requirement to do
> so ? Either stay with '-target 1.5' or introduce something which
> requires '-target 1.6' as a justification. Don't get me wrong. I don't
> get the poin
Am 07/24/13 03:10, schrieb jieryn:
> Greetings,
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
>> Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
>> Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
>> give up on Java 5 in favour of Java
Greetings,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
> Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
> Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
> give up on Java 5 in favour of Java 6 ?
"Politics is a strong and _slow_ boring
Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
give up on Java 5 in favour of Java 6 ?
--
Christian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-un
Hey All.
In the RTC/Jazz forum, a request came up for the ability to associate a
Work Item with the commits that the SCM plugin does.
On the Jazz side, I think that I've worked things out.
However, I am unsure as to how to best do this on the maven and scm
provider side.
The generic question bo
I'm cool with that.
+1
PS: The EOL date for Java 1.5 was not just for zOS, it applied to all
platforms for the IBM JDK, AIX and Linux included.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> +1
>
> 2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of
+1
2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to stick to the minimum Java
+1
2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to stick to the minimum Java
+1 binding
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
+1 binding
Wayne
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
> Core.
> >
> > Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project tha
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
+1
On Tuesday, 23 July 2013, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the final release of this plugin. After this release it will
> be retired, see separate vote thread for more info on that.
>
> We solved 1 issue:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11135&styleName=Ht
BIG +1 for 6, and small -1 for 7 for my own selfish reasons. The old
versions will always be available, and are forkable for anyone that needs a
fix, hence small -1 and not crying and moaning.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 July
On Tuesday, 23 July 2013, Michael-O <1983-01...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
>
>> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>>
>>
> Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
> discontinued, I would move t
Hi,
This will be the final release of this shared component. After this
release it will retire from the Apache Maven project and move to the
Apache Archiva project. See separate vote thread about that.
We solved 6 issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11761&styleName=
+1
Jeff
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Michael-O <1983-01...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
>
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>>
>>
> Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
> discontinu
Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
discontinued, I would move to Java 6 as a baseline not before Christman
2013. First release in 2014 can
+1 nb
On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly"
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to
+1
Arnaud
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> +1
> Le 23 juil. 2013 16:30, "Lennart Jörelid" a
> écrit :
>
> > +1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen
> instead
> > of me. :)
> >
> > I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven ba
Just realized that this might have got stuck in moderation since I
used the wrong From address...
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Dennis Lundberg
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had a look at, and fixed https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRRESOURCES-69
>
> When I first saw the issue I thought, hey this is in t
+1 from me.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Dennis Lundberg
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the final release of this plugin. After this release it will
> be retired, see separate vote thread for more info on that.
>
> We solved 1 issue:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=1113
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result:
+1 (binding): Olivier Lamy, Robert Scholte, Arnaud Héritier, Hervé
Boutemy, Wayne Fay, Stephen Connolly, Ralph Goers, Brett Porter,
Stephane Nicoll, Dennis Lundberg
+1 (non binding): Anders Hammar, Lennart Jörelid, Baptiste Mathus
I will continu
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result:
+1 (binding): Arnaud Héritier, Hervé Boutemy, Wayne Fay, Stephen
Connolly, Ralph Goers, Brett Porter, Dennis Lundberg
+1 (non binding): Lennart Jörelid, Baptiste Mathus
I will continue with the steps required to retire this shared component.
On
+1 from me.
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The only consumer of Maven Model Converter we have left at the Apache
> Maven project is Maven One Plugin. If the vote for the retirement of
> Maven One Plugin succeeds we should also retire Maven Model Converter.
> The
+1 from me.
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that we have Maven 1 at End-Of-Life, I think it's time to retire
> Maven One Plugin as well. It has been almost six years since the last
> release. I therefor propose that we retire maven-one-plugin.
>
> http://mav
Hi,
This is the final release of this plugin. After this release it will
be retired, see separate vote thread for more info on that.
We solved 1 issue:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11135&styleName=Html&version=14478
There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
h
+1
Le 23 juil. 2013 16:30, "Lennart Jörelid" a
écrit :
> +1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen instead
> of me. :)
>
> I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven basis; JDK 1.6 is
> at or near EOL and the step from one
> minimum JDK version to another
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result:
+1 (binding): Arnaud Héritier, Robert Scholte, Stéphane Nicoll, Ralph
Goers, Stephen Connolly, Olivier Lamy, Kristian Rosenvold, Wayne Fay,
Brett Porter, Dennis Lundberg
+1 (non binding): Lennart Jörelid, Anders Hammar, Baptiste Mathus, Chris Gra
+1 from me as well.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> It has been almost five years since I made the last release of
> maven-idea-plugin. The features in IDEA to integrate Maven has been greatly
> improved since then, making our own plugin obsolete. I therefor propo
> First of all STFB.
I just have to ask... what is STFB? :) I can think of a few things
that might work but none seem appropriate.
Wayne
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
+1 non binding.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Jeff Jensen <
jeffjen...@upstairstechnology.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
> Core.
> >
> > Maven Plugins prod
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will s
+1 (non-binding)
/Anders (mobile)
Den 23 jul 2013 16:00 skrev "Stephen Connolly" <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older vers
Sure, go for it. Create a patch and attach it to the jira ticket.
/Anders (mobile)
Den 23 jul 2013 16:58 skrev "Gilles Seghaier" :
> Hi all,
>
> First of all STFB.
>
> My name is Gilles Seghaier, I'm a 25 years old french computer engineer
> working for TIBCO Sofware Inc. at Paris (France).
> I h
Hi all,
First of all STFB.
My name is Gilles Seghaier, I'm a 25 years old french computer engineer
working for TIBCO Sofware Inc. at Paris (France).
I have developed with Maven since 2012, implementing some custom plugins to
integrate my company solutions into Maven's ecosystem, helping developer
On 23 July 2013 15:29, Lennart Jörelid wrote:
> +1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen instead
> of me. :)
>
> I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven basis; JDK 1.6 is
> at or near EOL and the step from one
> minimum JDK version to another (i.e. JD
+1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen instead
of me. :)
I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven basis; JDK 1.6 is
at or near EOL and the step from one
minimum JDK version to another (i.e. JDK 1.7) would be just as painful as
the step to JDK 1.6 - bu
+1, unsure if you could have muddied the essentially simple question
much more, but OK. :-p
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> On 23 July 2013 14:59, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
>
>> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Cor
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:59:49 +0100
Stephen Connolly wrote:
+1 (non binding)
tony.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
require to stick to the minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core
version.
+1 (binding)
On 23 July 2013 14:59, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> requir
1) No opinion.
2) No opinion.
3) HUGE +1
Thanks for your efforts! :-)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I updated the plugin-testing tools to work with Maven 3.1.0 to help Manfred
> get the Android Maven Plugin's test harness working with 3.1.0. A couple
> things:
Hi,
I updated the plugin-testing tools to work with Maven 3.1.0 to help Manfred get
the Android Maven Plugin's test harness working with 3.1.0. A couple things:
1. There is an @Override for a method implemented for an interface which you
can only start doing in Java 1.6 and the compiler was def
49 matches
Mail list logo
