I think the user experience for everyone but the most active members may
regress by moving issues to GH. Maven has a lot of repositories(100+) and
almost as many jira projects. I'm never quite sure if I'm logging an issue
to the correct jira project. And I suspect that federating out into 100+
diff
> * Other reporting plugins we provide are not being upgraded
Are those other plugins no longer supported by the Maven team?
Looking at https://maven.apache.org/plugins/
The changelog, changes, and linkcheck plugins look to be the only three
reporting plugins not being upgraded.
On Tue, Jul 9, 20
Is this proposal because elements from the super pom has been removed from
4.x?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6054
https://maven.apache.org/ref/3.9.8/maven-model-builder/super-pom.html
https://maven.apache.org/ref/4.0.0-alpha-9/maven-model-builder/super-pom.html
Which changes a new use
I would like to ask if profile activation[1] on the maven version can be
(re)considered for inclusion into 4.0.0
I have a common base pom at work and was taking 4.0.0 for a spin and ran
into some issues where I needed to start flexing some config based on the
maven version. I think part of this is
The behavior of the threads argument in .mvn/maven.config appears to have a
regression.
With 3.8.7 "-T 1C" works from the command line and .mvn/maven/config
With 3.9.0 "-T1C" works from the command line and .mvn/maven/config
With 3.9.0 "-T 1C" works from the command line only
"-P profile_name" w
Sorry if this comes through twice, I wasn't subscribed when I sent it the
first time.
-1 (non-binding)
Have not been able to verify the correction for MENFORCER-394 is working.
Added example of the issue being reproduced in the staged release.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MENFORCER-394?f
