If shade plugin is always bound to package phase, then I'd say it should
not get reactor dependency target/classes folders under normal
circumstances.
--
Regards,
Igor
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015, at 03:21 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> Yeah, I sort of understand.
>
> But that really means there is
W00t - Congrats to all involved in the release!
Mark
On 16 Nov 2015, at 9:19, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> w00t at last!
>
> On Sunday 15 November 2015, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>
>> This vote passes. I'll work on a little documentation and release it early
>> next week.
--
Mark Derricutt
http://
To my thinking this is a case of special circumstances. I wrote a test case
but didn't understand how to integrate the test case correctly into the
suite and as such a regression crept in when fixing some regressions in
other (non-covered) areas of the version inheritance code. I attribute at
least
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/49
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enable
Whether you're incrementing the last number by one or labeling it RC, you
end up with a new release regardless. I don't have an issue with burning
numbers at all; it's out there for people to consume immediately no matter
what you call it. IMO, if anyone is concerned with the quality, either vote
i
Yeah, I sort of understand.
But that really means there is no "good" use case for letting shade
read classes from target/classes within the reactor(?)
Kristian
2015-11-14 20:15 GMT+01:00 Igor Fedorenko :
> Run the build with -X and see what mojos are executed for mshade171-base
> project:
>
w00t at last!
On Sunday 15 November 2015, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> This vote passes. I'll work on a little documentation and release it early
> next week.
>
> > On Nov 10, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Jason van Zyl > wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Time to release Maven 3.3.9!
> >
> > Here is a link to the issu
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> That's how it use to work, but that requires a double voting process: vote
> once on the RC and then again if the RC is ready for production. It's
> easier to just burn the numbers; if it fails, move to the next; otherwise
> you release what
That's how it use to work, but that requires a double voting process: vote
once on the RC and then again if the RC is ready for production. It's
easier to just burn the numbers; if it fails, move to the next; otherwise
you release what you have.
Cheers,
Paul
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:48 AM, And
That's how Maven core releases were done in the early v3.0.x days.
Personally I think it worked very good.
/Anders (mobile)
On Nov 15, 2015 15:40, "Benson Margulies" wrote:
> Given the number of 'burned' releases recently, I thought people might
> be interested in hearing about an alternative ap
Given the number of 'burned' releases recently, I thought people might
be interested in hearing about an alternative approach.
When a Lucene dev has a sudden urge to make a release, he or she set
up a release with a version of x.y.z-RC1. This is a real release. It
goes up for a vote.
If there's s
Github user nitram509 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/71#issuecomment-156813724
I've just rebased the latest commits from master.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
This vote passes. I'll work on a little documentation and release it early next
week.
> On Nov 10, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Time to release Maven 3.3.9!
>
> Here is a link to the issues resolved:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12
Hi,
Note: This is a Maven 3.0 / JDK 6 release
We solved 7 issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317922&version=12333967
There are several issue open:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MSHARED%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%
14 matches
Mail list logo
