Reading more responses, it seems like a lot of people want A so Maven
can "help" people with their builds. In the long-run (post 2.1), I
also like A, but we can't jump there overnight.
Today I prefer B, but I am OK with A if we do the following:
1. Have a tag in the pom, which is also available o
Brett Porter pisze:
> [X] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
> parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we
> should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current
> discussion)
> [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make usin
A - I'm already doing it in a corporate parent POM which must have now
approximatively 1000 lines. It's not perfect but It's the better
solution to have a reproductive build. It's also a workaround because
I proxy in only one repository releases and snapshots coming from
everywhere because we have
On 9/3/07, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A
>
> I think this is *critical* to reduce build fragility which is
> currently affects many/most Maven 2 builds.
+1 for reducing build fragility, however we can do it
>
> IMO, making the version required, just like it is for dependencies is
>
On 9/1/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
> topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
>
> [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
> parent hierarchy somewhere, at t
> [ ] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a
> best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such
> as having the repository manager handle the available plugins
B.
The release plugin should lock version numbers down as part of the
release process and the
ery short POM so the
amount of typing required just to get a project off the ground would be
minimal.
- Original Message -
From: "Brett Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Maven Developers List"
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 10:48 PM
Subject: [poll] Requi
Jason Dillon wrote:
On Sep 3, 2007, at 11:24 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default behavior,
which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical projects. If they
don't specify versions they should however be nagged by a warning that
it is bad p
A
--
Olivier
-Message d'origine-
De : Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : dimanche 2 septembre 2007 04:48
À : Maven Developers List
Objet : [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or later
I'd like to hear from as many people as poss
(A)
-Lukas
Brett Porter wrote:
I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
[ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbos
A
Rationale: my expectation, and I suspect most developers'
expectations, is that when I build my product with a tool and my
source does not change and I do not explicitly install a new version
of my tool, that my resulting binary does not change either. With
dynamic downloads of plug-ins (i.e., d
On Sep 3, 2007, at 11:24 AM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default
behavior, which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical
projects. If they don't specify versions they should however be
nagged by a warning that it is bad practice.
Urg...
B
Regards,
Garvin LeClaire
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brett Porter wrote:
I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
[ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
parent hierarchy
As discussed in the other thread I'd like B as the default behavior,
which is good for beginners and smaller/non-critical projects. If they
don't specify versions they should however be nagged by a warning that
it is bad practice.
This combined with an easy way to turn on the enforcer (or some
B
Hervé
Le dimanche 2 septembre 2007, Brett Porter a écrit :
> I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
> topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
>
> [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
> parent hierarchy some
On 3 Sep 07, at 8:25 AM 3 Sep 07, Jason Dillon wrote:
So, again... me thinky... A nay B.
I think ultimately with the enforcer method you A) when you are
ready, and it's very easy to do. I've been using it in a few builds
now for a couple weeks and it's a great way to enforce it at th
I've peeped over some of the other responses and seems like many want
to keep things as they are... and well I'm a bit confused by that.
Why would you want to have the version of something you require to
build your project to dynamically change? This dynamic behavior
already can cause some
[A] All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we
should look at ways to make this easier/smaller/etc per the current
discussion)
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
Brett Porter schreef:
I'd like to hear from
[A]. IMO this is totally critical to generate auditably correct builds,
which ought to be the default. I've got 3 or 4 maven-built projects, and
it's already a bit of a nightmare - I really really don't want to be in the
situation where downloading new releases of mvn 'magically' updates plugins,
o
A
I think this is *critical* to reduce build fragility which is
currently affects many/most Maven 2 builds.
IMO, making the version required, just like it is for dependencies is
a bit of a burden, but will dramatically increase the build longevity
of Maven 2 projects.
(And actually, onc
s message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/-poll--Requiring-users-to-specify-plugin-versions-in-Maven-2.1-or-later-tf4366501s177.html#a12461810
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscr
Aren't the compiler versions defaulted to a value already?
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoffrey De Smet
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 7:24 AM
To: dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Mave
Has anyone thought about "enforcing" the compiler-plugin source and
target version also to be locked down?
The default is also causing much grief.
"mvn enforcer:make-maven-stable"
could then call
"mvn enforcer:lock-plugins enforcer:lock-compiler"
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
Andrew Will
Oops, I just wrote something similar in the other vote thread.
Agree entirely, but the enforcer is not the right place for it,
perhaps a plugin-manager plugin or such.
Andy
On 2 Sep 2007, at 19:33, Arik Kfir wrote:
Hi,
As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some
p
Same here.
Thanks,
Stéphane
On 9/2/07, Arik Kfir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin
> (could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this
> configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of:
>
>
lDeps=true".
> -Original Message-
> From: Arik Kfir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 1:34 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [poll] Requiring users to specify plugin versions in Maven 2.1 or
> later
>
> Hi,
>
> As a heavy Maven **use
On 2 Sep 07, at 11:33 AM 2 Sep 07, Arik Kfir wrote:
Hi,
As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some
plugin
(could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this
configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of:
mvn enforcer:lock-plugins
T
Hi,
As a heavy Maven **user**, what would be best for us is having some plugin
(could be the enforcer, or another) automatically generate this
configuration for us into the POM. Something along the lines of:
mvn enforcer:lock-plugins
This command will find the most appropriate version of relevan
B
Totally agree with Wayne here.
-D
On 9/2/07, Wayne Fay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a
> > best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such
> > as having the repository manager handle the available plugins
>
> [X] (B) Retain the current behaviour, but make using the enforcer a
> best practice to do the above, or some other control mechanism such
> as having the repository manager handle the available plugins
I am thinking about the new user experience and winning more converts. As such,
I think t
B
Raphaël
2007/9/2, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
> topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
>
> [ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
> parent hierarchy somewhere,
B
With the following proviso:
I'd like to see main Maven releases more often, and have those main
releases specify a suite of endorsed plugin versions for that Maven
release.
That way, if I want a stable reproducible build, I just continue to use
the version of Maven that I built with. It
I'd like to hear from as many people as possible their opinion this
topic (even if you just want to say '0' so we know where you stand).
[ ] (A) All plugin versions must be specified by the project or its
parent hierarchy somewhere, at the cost of some verbosity (though we
should look at wa
33 matches
Mail list logo
