Github user Tibor17 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/151
Thx for contributing. Pls close the PR.
---
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 feat
Using immutable collections in Maven was exactly my advice in 2013/2014.
Usually it is bad to share collections especially when using concurrent
Threads.
Normally there should be service methods which change some object state
*safely* or thread safe. Personally I think plugins will break with
immut
Hi all,
I would like to merge [1] directly with master.
It seems to me quite reasonable user's fix.
OK?
[1]: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/151
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Tunaki wrote:
> GitHub user Tunaki opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven-sur
Github user Tunaki commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/151
Yes, I was finishing typing it up:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1375.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user Tibor17 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/151
@Tunaki
Good catch. Would you create Jira ticket in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
rep
GitHub user Tunaki opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/151
Fixing build on Windows cmd.exe.
Files generated with the XJC tool were using the platform encoding, that
can be different from the project source encoding. In this case, the project
source
done
Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 19:54:19 CEST Michael Osipov a écrit :
> Am 2017-05-28 um 17:38 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
> > Michael,
> >
> > is it ok for you now?
>
> I prefer option 2. Go ahead with it.
>
> > Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 11:16:58 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit :
> >> Let's go for optio
Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 19:50:03 CEST Michael Osipov a écrit :
> > How many cases are changed? In which areas of Maven API?
> > That is the information I need to vote for this change, knowing the
> > effective impact it will have
>
> As far as I can see for the changes, they all look like read-on
Am 2017-05-28 um 17:38 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Michael,
is it ok for you now?
I prefer option 2. Go ahead with it.
Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 11:16:58 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit :
Let's go for option 2
Le dim. 28 mai 2017 à 12:44, Robert Scholte a écrit :
On behalf of the expert group I c
Am 2017-05-28 um 13:01 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
I'm not confident on this one.
I understand the inconsistency issue, that may lead to edge-case issues in
plugins or extensions (that unexpectedly get an immutable empty list when they
usually get a modifiable non-empty list)
Is it the right solutio
I started to review each modification in depth and write a summary, but I
stopped since I know nobody will read it because of TLDR;
I preferred rewrite the issue description as:
"All those methods should return a collection with consistent "mutability":
either mutable, either immutable.
Given e
Michael,
is it ok for you now?
Regards,
Hervé
Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 11:16:58 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit :
> Let's go for option 2
>
> Le dim. 28 mai 2017 à 12:44, Robert Scholte a écrit :
> > On behalf of the expert group I can confirm we agreed on this solution.
> > I don't see any reas
I think we should do this step, either now or with a next major release.
And it's about the *returned* Lists which now become unmodifiable. As far
as I can see all these changes have a setter which should be used to
specify a new list.
These changes should protect developers which use the ret
Let's go for option 2
Le dim. 28 mai 2017 à 12:44, Robert Scholte a écrit :
> On behalf of the expert group I can confirm we agreed on this solution.
> I don't see any reason why this would change as this topic is marked as
> resolved.
> And I think it is a good sign, for some reason there is/wa
I'm not confident on this one.
I understand the inconsistency issue, that may lead to edge-case issues in
plugins or extensions (that unexpectedly get an immutable empty list when they
usually get a modifiable non-empty list)
Is it the right solution to change every non-empty list to immutable?
On behalf of the expert group I can confirm we agreed on this solution.
I don't see any reason why this would change as this topic is marked as
resolved.
And I think it is a good sign, for some reason there is/was this rumor
that Maven doesn't run on J9.
I second option 2.
thanks,
Robert
O
+1
Robert
On Sun, 28 May 2017 12:01:20 +0200, Michael Osipov
wrote:
Am 2017-05-25 um 21:12 schrieb Michael Osipov:
Who seconds MNG-6164 for 3.5.1?
This is a non-functional consistency fix. All ITs pass.
Anyone?
-
To
Am 2017-05-25 um 21:12 schrieb Michael Osipov:
Who seconds MNG-6164 for 3.5.1?
This is a non-functional consistency fix. All ITs pass.
Anyone?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional command
Am 2017-05-28 um 09:43 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
are there seconders for
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/17f804d7
(aka "option 2")?
I'd completely leave it off to 1.x until the expect group with Mark
Reinhold has agreed on the disputed points.
I don't see a reason t
Am 2017-05-27 um 11:42 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY:
Hi,
No objection from me, thanks for keeping the ball rolling.
I tried to improve documentation by adding some useful links to other related
components [1]: I think the current state is better and ok for a release.
One key question now is about Aet
are there seconders for
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/17f804d7
(aka "option 2")?
Regards,
Hervé
Le samedi 27 mai 2017, 19:05:27 CEST Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit :
> good links
> yes, with this in mind, "api" is required for artifactId but should not be
> added to module
21 matches
Mail list logo
