Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

-1: fix pending bugs, otherwise users will report more bugs For instance Robert said the above fix was a workaround. On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be con

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

one question I have on this is: how do we want to track issues in Jira? Do we let 3.5.0 open (with its 65 issues) or do we release it renamed as 3.5.0-alpha-1? Do we create a 3.5.0-alpha-1 version just to mark bugs found in 3.5.0-alpha-1 as "affects version"? Regards, Hervé Le samedi 18 févrie

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

if we go with the "alpha-1" road, let's use the benefit: it may have some little issues then +1 to cut alpha-1 now Regards, Hervé Le vendredi 17 février 2017, 18:57:18 CET Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > +1 for to have the cat out of the box !!! > > Le ven. 17 févr. 2017 à 19:19, Stephen Connolly

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

there is some level of misunderstanding my proposal is not to force any default value: just check (for people publishing to Central) that chosen value starts with groupId then, in some Maven plugin, we can independently propose magic help to propose auto-calculated default values to people usi

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 02/17/17 um 19:18 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a > death march with no end in site... so I am seeking ways to identify an end > where we can cut 3.5.0 and start o

Recent issues found in Surefire master/Maven Clean Plugin 3.0.0 with Maven master

Hi folks, Christian Schulte asked me a couple of days ago wether I am able to build Surefire master with Maven master. It was constantly failing for him on his OpenBSD machines. Since I have several real servers with FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE at hand I did run all Surefire ITs and I was able to rep

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

> > The idea is to not default to group:artifact but to check if the artifact > starts with a suffix of the group-ID and then skip this. So g=org.hibernate > a=hibernate-core would become org.hibernate.core and not > org.hibernate.hibernate.core. This is a neat trick I wished in the past in > some

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

+1 for to have the cat out of the box !!! Le ven. 17 févr. 2017 à 19:19, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? > > I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a > death march with no en

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Would it help yet to cut an alpha and start tracking bugs? I am starting to be concerned that the collective of volunteers are on a death march with no end in site... so I am seeking ways to identify an end where we can cut 3.5.0 and start on 3.5.1 I don't want to be here in 2-3 weeks and still n

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Am 2017-02-17 um 18:03 schrieb Arnaud Héritier: Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have a bug in 3.5 and not in 3.3.9 but for now no time to dig The project : https://github.com/jenkinsci/maven-plugin Downloading: https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/snapshots/org/jenkins-ci/mai

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user Tibor17 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 @sbrannen It looks like we will rename 2.19.2 to 2.20.0, but this is not official yet. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on Git

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

I would expect this to be a wagon issue. Could you try to replace only these jars? i.e. wagon-*-2.12 back to wagon-*-2.10 as in 3.3.9 Robert On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:03:04 +0100, Arnaud Héritier wrote: Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have a bug in 3.5 and not i

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

It happens with ArrayList filled up with objects in writer Thread. Reader will see: size=5, and Object array has all elements null. In such cases I use ConcurrentLinkedQueue, thread-safe impl without using locks - just write once and reads multiple times - or use Guava. Does this happen with this?

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Is there someone who tried to deploy a "large" artifact ? I have a bug in 3.5 and not in 3.3.9 but for now no time to dig The project : https://github.com/jenkinsci/maven-plugin Here are the logs with 3.3.9 Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; 2015-11-10T17:41:47+01:00)

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi all, At which line is NPE? [1] looks like multithreading. Is NPE cause due to Java Memory Model? One thread is writer, seconds is reader, and object is not thread-safe (immutable, synchronized either volatile). [1] https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven.git;a=commitdiff;h=238f789ad07

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

Thats how I understand it as well and I like it. Brian Fox wrote on 2017-02-17 06:01: > Hervé: I feel like I don't completely understand the proposal, but I feel > like we can achieve your intent using the Module-Name simply by defaulting > it to g:a and building up a good base of new stuff goin

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi Karl Heinz, looking at the commit[1] I see that the projectBuildList.contains will prevent the NPE, but it looks weird to me that the projectBuildList does not contain a mavenProject which was marked as finished so can be built. Why is it null? If there's no clear reason yet, there shoul

How are artifacts resolved from the reactor via LegacyRepositorySystem?

Hello. I'm currently trying to debug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MASSEMBLY-848 and am reaching this line: https://github.com/apache/maven-plugins/blob/trunk/maven-assembly-plugin/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugins/assembly/artifact/DefaultDependencyResolver.java#L232 I'm debugging

Re: I think we are ready for 3.5.0-alpha-1

Hi, I have identified a bug[1] in Maven Core based on an issue related to versions-maven-plugin: I have made already a fix for it and all tests are running[2]. Any objection to merge that issue into master ? Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-617

Re: Fwd: How to name modules, automatic and otherwise

Hervé: I feel like I don't completely understand the proposal, but I feel like we can achieve your intent using the Module-Name simply by defaulting it to g:a and building up a good base of new stuff going into Central such that when people start using jigsaw, there is a good pattern in place and w

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user sbrannen commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 Very happy to hear that the Surefire team has taken over the provider for the JUnit Platform!!! Thanks! 😄 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and

[GitHub] maven-surefire issue #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donated by JU...

Github user sbrannen commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142 @marcphilipp, 2.19.2 will support "*Tests" by default as well: https://twitter.com/sam_brannen/status/766979129954570240 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this

[GitHub] maven-surefire pull request #142: SUREFIRE-1330: Import provider code donate...

Github user sbrannen commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/142#discussion_r101716366 --- Diff: surefire-providers/pom.xml --- @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ surefire-junit3 surefire-junit4 surefire-junit47 +suref