Push them forward.
On Dec 11, 2014, at 3:27 PM, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2014-12-11 um 18:56 schrieb Jason van Zyl:
>> I plan to call a vote to release Maven 3.2.4 today if there are no
>> objections.
>
> There are ten outstanding issues in Jira. What about them?
>
> Michael
>
>
> ---
Up to Olivier as he does the work on it. I don't use it or work on it so I
would not be comfortable making that update.
On Dec 11, 2014, at 3:16 PM, Mark Nelson wrote:
> Hi Jason,
> Would that proposed release make the new http wagon 2.8 the default wagon?
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Nelson | Architect
Am 2014-12-11 um 18:56 schrieb Jason van Zyl:
I plan to call a vote to release Maven 3.2.4 today if there are no objections.
There are ten outstanding issues in Jira. What about them?
Michael
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-un
Hi Jason,
Would that proposed release make the new http wagon 2.8 the default wagon?
Thanks,
Mark Nelson | Architect | 61.2.9491.1177
Platform Engineering
Oracle Development
http://redstack.wordpress.com/
"Oracle BPM Suite 11g: Advanced BPMN Topics"
by Mark Nelson and Tanya Williams
http://bit.l
Hi Jason,
No real objections...
Just something to mention
module1
module2
In Maven 3.2.1...3 this produces a WARNING which should be a failure in
my opinion ? Created an appropriate JIRA
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-5734
That was the reason to start looking into t
I plan to call a vote to release Maven 3.2.4 today if there are no objections.
Thanks,
Jason
--
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
http://twitter.com/takari_io
---
either mojo or a pull request against the assembly plugin (as you may need
to tweak the assembly:single default parameters)
On 11 December 2014 at 14:54, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I am in agreement with Stephen. If I decide to try to prototype this out,
> where is a good place to lay down some code
I am in agreement with Stephen. If I decide to try to prototype this out,
where is a good place to lay down some code?
Cheers,
Paul
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think having an assembly type with a default binding of assembly:s
I think having an assembly type with a default binding of assembly:single
to the packaging phase and a default descriptor being the zip or zip and
tar.gz descriptors would achieve what is required while simplifying
escalating to more complex descriptors
On Thursday, December 11, 2014, Timothy Astl
I have a situation/problem/use-case where I would like to take a
collection of XML schemas and create a bundle of themso that they could
be included into other projects. The destination projects vary. Some
are written in Java, some in C++, etc. So I'd like to produce amore
platform agnostic b
Hmm, not sure I agree - I think its just fact that users would love to have
simpler way to create ZIPs/TARs
and the most logical/simple way (from a users point of view) to do this is a
packaging typ for these.
Domi
On 11.12.2014, at 09:27, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> Well the real question is
Well the real question is what would you do with dependencies?
So, for example, if you have a zip dependency, do you unpack it and overlay
or do you copy it in? Or do you do nothing and leave it to the dependency
plugin?
What about zip vs tar.gz dependency? If building a zip I might expect
explod
K, B
/Anders
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a run-off vote to select the top two options for our new mascot's
> name.
>
> The entries with the highest number of votes will be selected for the final
> round. If there is only o
Yes, but I don't think making a specific plugin just for adding zip
packaging is optimal. Hence the idea of having it in the assembly plugin.
Thinking of it though, one very likely wants to create both a zip and a tar
file. So maybe the packaging type should be something else, and then it
creates b
14 matches
Mail list logo
