Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

We nearly never backport fixes. Support just means that there is a chance it still works.. realistically we only support latest release.. Manfred Tibor Digana wrote on 2020-04-16 13:30 (GMT -07:00): > I want to ask a question regarding the maintenance of old minor > versions because i've starte

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

All features are already in Maven Resolver .. We should deprecate everything before 3.5.0 imho Or if really necessary everything before 3.2.5 Gabriel Belingueres wrote on 2020-04-16 17:35 (GMT -07:00): > +1 to deprecate 3.0.x to get rid of Sonatype Aether, which would > considerably simplify

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

+1 to deprecate 3.0.x to get rid of Sonatype Aether, which would considerably simplify the dependency handling code base. Not my use case, but,just to put it over the table, we should check the Eclipse Aether New and Noteworthy page [1] to see if there is some particular requirement over aether li

[ANN] Maven Fluido Skin 1.9 released

The Apache Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the Maven Fluido Skin, version 1.9. https://maven.apache.org/skins/maven-fluido-skin/ You should specify the version in your project's site configuration: org.apache.maven.skins maven-fluido-skin 1.9 Release Notes - Maven Fl

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Maven Fluido Skin version 1.9

Hi, The vote has passed with the following result: +1: Michael Osipov, Sylwester Lachiewicz, Tibor Digana, Karl Heiz Marbaise PMC quorum: reached I will promote the artifacts to the central repo, the source release ZIP file and add this release the board report.

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

I want to ask a question regarding the maintenance of old minor versions because i've started missing the right meaning of what deprecation of Maven (not plugins) means. Due to now we are at Maven 3.6.3 we support the bugfixing of 3.6.x family. But AFAIK we won't suppor bugfixing of 3.5 families an

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 3:04 PM Sesterhenn, Jörg wrote: > Hi, please let me give you a users perspective: > > 1) deprecate *every* version that is not likely to get an important > issue (even if it only concerns a core plugin) fixed timely - no matter > how old it is. Anything else is lying to yo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven GPG Plugin version 3.0.0

For MGPG-59[1] the version had to be parsed because of a feature that only works for gpg2. Robert [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MGPG-59 On 15-4-2020 23:12:47, Tibor Digana wrote: Why this plugin has been working for many years and with the same gpg installation? There has to be a

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

The answer is 3.1.0. It is way more easier to say "plugins are Maven 3.1 or 3.1.x compatible". The APIs are the same, there should be no impact. So compile with 3.1.0 dependencies, run on Jenkins with 3.1.1 (as being the last 3.1.x release, like we do with all 3.x.latest) We had the same discuss

Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Hi, please let me give you a users perspective: 1) deprecate *every* version that is not likely to get an important issue (even if it only concerns a core plugin) fixed timely - no matter how old it is. Anything else is lying to yourself and your users about your capability. There is no shame

Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Hi, please let me give you a users perspective: 1) deprecate *every* version that is not likely to get an important issue (even if it only concerns a core plugin) fixed timely - no matter how old it is. Anything else is lying to yourself and your users about your capability. There is no shame

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Fluido Skin version 1.9

Am 2020-04-13 um 23:07 schrieb Michael Osipov: Hi, We solved 8 issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12346750&styleName=Text&projectId=12317926 There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MSKINS%

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Le jeudi 16 avril 2020, 13:06:31 CEST Elliotte Rusty Harold a écrit : > Have we documented anywhere exactly what's going on with aether? This > was a huge stumbling block when I first started working with the > Mavena and Aether code a couple of years ago. There was so much old > and out of date co

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Le jeudi 16 avril 2020, 13:01:31 CEST Elliotte Rusty Harold a écrit : > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > > I agree with Herve to start with deprecating 3.0.x. > > And what sounds nice to me is producing the plugins with 3.1 as > > minimum and clearing the old code and tests fo

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Hi, On 16.04.20 12:22, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: we're back at defining what our community support on every Maven parts means to me, support for Maven core releases not only means that we would release security bugfix if security issues were found (very low probability), but more that we do *extra e

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Have we documented anywhere exactly what's going on with aether? This was a huge stumbling block when I first started working with the Mavena and Aether code a couple of years ago. There was so much old and out of date contradictory information out there on different web sites, and no way I could f

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > > I agree with Herve to start with deprecating 3.0.x. > And what sounds nice to me is producing the plugins with 3.1 as > minimum and clearing the old code and tests for 3.0.x. > This sounds like a plan for the community. > I concur with this

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

So next quick question - should be 3.1.0 or 3.1.1 - last and recommend version for Java 5? Sylwester czw., 16 kwi 2020, 12:53 użytkownik Tibor Digana napisał: > I agree with Herve to start with deprecating 3.0.x. > And what sounds nice to me is producing the plugins with 3.1 as > minimum and cl

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

I agree with Herve to start with deprecating 3.0.x. And what sounds nice to me is producing the plugins with 3.1 as minimum and clearing the old code and tests for 3.0.x. This sounds like a plan for the community. On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:22 PM Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > > we're back at defining wh

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

we're back at defining what our community support on every Maven parts means to me, support for Maven core releases not only means that we would release security bugfix if security issues were found (very low probability), but more that we do *extra efforts on plugins to be checked for compatibi

Re: [CANCELLED] [VOTE] Release Apache Maven GPG Plugin version 3.0.0

I will open a new PR for issue 78. Currently the issue is the $ end tag in pattern https://github.com/apache/maven-gpg-plugin/blob/master/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/plugins/gpg/GpgVersion.java#L50 however the number of versions should be limited to e.g. 3 which is enough. On Thu, Apr 16, 2020

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

@Eric: no, it is the other way around, we must not abandon users of 5yo versions IHO, we must pass it. it is not the case of 3.3 (it is exactly 5yo and gap with 3.5 is 2 years, this is why i'd wait 1 more year to deprecate 3.3). That said in terms of impact for us, if you read the end of the propos

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Well, it's been supported for five years now, which was the threshold you mentioned to be reasonable. - Eric L On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:29 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Eric, point is that we can't deprecate 3.3 too IMHO. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Hi Eric, point is that we can't deprecate 3.3 too IMHO. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

But the proposal was not to deprecate 3.5, but anything below (since 3.5 was when the resolver was introduced)? - Eric L On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Tibor, technically you are likely right but deprecating is not only > technical, i'd say it is only 10% of the

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

Hi Tibor, technically you are likely right but deprecating is not only technical, i'd say it is only 10% of the choice (even if it is what triggers the discussion). The biggest part for me is how it affects users. 3.5.x is only 3 years old so I think it is too early to deprecate it (guess we should

Re: Proposal to deprecate Maven 3.0.x

The Eclipse Aether looks like a strong argument. If any user would open an issue to provide a fix on the top of Eclipse Aether then we say 'no' already today in 3.7.0. So the user has to switch to 3.5.0+ which would end up for him as the same as deprecating 3.0.x - 3.3.x. I know that it is a big ex