Enrico, there is one problem with maven-help-plugin which generates
"HelpMojo.java" with the problematic "".
First the plugin should be fixed and released and the maven-parent;
otherwise all plugins would end up with complicated configuration of
maven-compiler-plugin as Surefire has.
On Tue, Jan 1
The fork is, I think, because of the "compilerArgs", but pls check it in
the Maven compiler's documentation.
IMHo the profile activated by JDK8 can be added to "maven-parent" pom and
the new release version 34 can already have it.
If it helps the all Maven projects will have this possibility on CI
Good idea!
Why fork=true?
In general I see that new java versions have always stricter validation of
javadocs
It would be better to have a CI job with jdk11 (12 next quarter...and so on)
We already have tests over every supported platform, so Tibor's idea of
adding doclint option whill enable us t
These errors with JavaDoc in source code can be effectively avoided with
adding a JDK8 Profile in pom.xml and a config of compiler.
You do not need to wait for making a release when the Site is generated.
Even the contributor will fails his build when compiling and testing
project in his own:
o
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 23:55:20 +0100, Chris Graham
wrote:
I am used to running mvn clean install site on my Jenkins build jobs and
then let the Jenkins checkstyle, find bugs etc plugins display the
results/trends over builds.
This should work with a simple 'mvn verify site' too.
And I t
I am used to running mvn clean install site on my Jenkins build jobs and then
let the Jenkins checkstyle, find bugs etc plugins display the results/trends
over builds.
And I thought the ASF Jenkins used to have this feature.
Are there any plans to restore this?
Also, I attempted to build all o
On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 13:12:36 +0100, Hervé BOUTEMY
wrote:
Le samedi 29 décembre 2018, 11:29:53 CET Robert Scholte a écrit :
I've already introduces the concept of "plans"[1][2], which also include
'site' for documentation and 'release' to verify if the project is
releasable (should probably c
Le samedi 29 décembre 2018, 11:29:53 CET Robert Scholte a écrit :
> I've already introduces the concept of "plans"[1][2], which also include
> 'site' for documentation and 'release' to verify if the project is
> releasable (should probably change that name to prevent confusion).
+1 to change the na
I've already introduces the concept of "plans"[1][2], which also include
'site' for documentation and 'release' to verify if the project is
releasable (should probably change that name to prevent confusion).
The jobs are getting more stable, so we might give it a try soon. Just
need to be awa
Hi Enrico,
On 29/12/18 09:53, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
Karl,
Il giorno sab 29 dic 2018 alle ore 09:41 Karl Heinz Marbaise
ha scritto:
Hi Enrico,
On 29/12/18 09:14, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
Hi guys,
I am trying to release Maven Assembly Plugin and I see that there are
a few showstoppers due to
Karl,
Il giorno sab 29 dic 2018 alle ore 09:41 Karl Heinz Marbaise
ha scritto:
>
> Hi Enrico,
>
> On 29/12/18 09:14, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > I am trying to release Maven Assembly Plugin and I see that there are
> > a few showstoppers due to javadocs and site generation.
>
>
> Can
Hi Enrico,
On 29/12/18 09:14, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
Hi guys,
I am trying to release Maven Assembly Plugin and I see that there are
a few showstoppers due to javadocs and site generation.
Can you report which one?
Isn't it possible to run "javadoc:javadoc site" on CI ?
This way we won't
Hi guys,
I am trying to release Maven Assembly Plugin and I see that there are
a few showstoppers due to javadocs and site generation.
Isn't it possible to run "javadoc:javadoc site" on CI ?
This way we won't commit broken/unreleasable stuff
Enrico
--
13 matches
Mail list logo
