Github user khmarbaise commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-167975254
So we are talking about something completely different. I have cloned the
given repository `https://github.com/kilokahn/maven-testers/` and i can't find
a definition fo
Github user bastiao commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-167973833
Yes, you are right.
But In childs I would like to use:
foo-parent
${global.version}
com.kilo
Github user khmarbaise commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-167972348
The problem is simply related to using the version `0.0.2-SNAPSHOT` in
foo-business instead of `0.0.3-SNASPHOT` as parent version which will never
work...
---
If your
Github user bastiao commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-167913767
https://github.com/kilokahn/maven-testers/tree/master/foo-parent
this code does not work in 3.3.9 :(
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to thi
On 29 July 2015 at 13:10, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> So I hit the original MNG-5840 with non-version range parents doing
> something like the following.
>
> git clone {parent,client,server}
>
> Note that client and server both have
> ../parent/pom.xml
>
> Working away on server I spot a critical b
So I hit the original MNG-5840 with non-version range parents doing
something like the following.
git clone {parent,client,server}
Note that client and server both have
../parent/pom.xml
Working away on server I spot a critical bug that needs fixing.
cd server
git stash # so that I can switch b
I look local to mean “local repository” which is bad. Dealing with things only
in terms of the reactor/MMP is the only thing that makes sense.
> On Jul 28, 2015, at 9:34 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
>
> I am not sure I understand your concerns. Consider the following simple
> source tree with a pa
I am not sure I understand your concerns. Consider the following simple
source tree with a parent and single child project
some:parent:1.2.3
some:module parent=some:parent:[1.0,2.0)
Before this change Maven simply ignored local some:parent:1.2.3 when
building the module and always attem
At first blush this change seems like a bad idea to me. I consider the
reactor/multi-module project an atomic unit and this change runs counter to
that. Why do you want a parent installed instead of everything working
cohesively within the reactor?
Are you trying to build part of the tree for
It's not completely ugly, but it does entangle dependencies further which I
view as ugly.
There is an existing todo above this code to move the validation to a
different module, so I believe this will all get removed at that time
On Thursday, July 23, 2015, Benson Margulies wrote:
> If this cha
If this change is so ugly, why are there no comments explaining the ugly?
On Jul 23, 2015 10:48 AM, "jvanzyl" wrote:
> Github user jvanzyl commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-124129817
>
> I'm out in the middle of nowhere, but i'll canc
Github user jvanzyl commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-124129817
I'm out in the middle of nowhere, but i'll cancel the vote, test and
re-roll once I'm back to civilization.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this em
Github user stephenc commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-124128970
After no comments against merging this and with @ifedorenko saying go for
it I decided to merge... if people object they can revert it out. I am not in
love with this fix
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60
---
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
Github user ifedorenko commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-123711202
What other options do we have? I guess we can create new `maven-versioning`
module, move `org.apache.maven.artifact.versioning` implementation there and
change maven-ar
Github user stephenc commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60#issuecomment-123696060
@ifedorenko I've simplified this per your comments... still feel that
adding the dependency on maven-artifact is not the correct thing... but it is a
semi-reasonable fix
GitHub user stephenc opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/60
[MNG-5840] Parent version is a range hack
- I don't like this, but it does let all the integration tests pass:
```
Running org.apache.maven.it.MavenITmng2199ParentVersionRangeTest
mng
17 matches
Mail list logo
