Hi,
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> on maven-fluido skin, most history is perfect now. There is only one tag
that
> has been done from a branch: maven-fluido-skin-1.3.1
> But the current Git history does not represent this branch as a branch
from
> master done from commit
shared components and skins done (only 4 shared components remains to do:
maven-filtering, maven-osgi, maven-reporting-impl and maven-shared-jar, which
require a little bit of investigation like many plugins
Plamen, I have a new challenge for you :)
on maven-fluido skin, most history is perfect
Le mardi 2 janvier 2018, 14:32:00 CET Plamen Totev a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> > On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY
> > wrote: thank you Plamen: this script is really awesome!
>
> You're welcome. I'm glad it helped.
>
> > And I just pushed the result on maven-acr-plugin: you can see the r
Great
I pushed tags where the situation was clear.
I chose not to push maven-compiler-plugin-2.0.1, since it causes more trouble
than this minor version (from 2006, between 2.0 and 2.0.2) is worth
Same for maven-shade-plugin-1.0
I still need to work on maven-assembly-plugin, maven-dependency-pl
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJAVADOC-510
On 2 January 2018 at 13:42, Robert Scholte wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:16:37 +0100, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Now here's a strange one The maven-javadoc-plugin is getting a lot of
>> open tasks repo
On Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:16:37 +0100, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
Now here's a strange one The maven-javadoc-plugin is getting a lot of
open tasks reported... because there are UNIT tests forking Maven... what
is JavadocUtil.invokeMaven doing? Should it even be doing that... or
should
it be
Hi,
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY
> wrote:
> thank you Plamen: this script is really awesome!
You're welcome. I'm glad it helped.
> And I just pushed the result on maven-acr-plugin: you can see the result live.
> As you can see, the tags on GitBox [2] are updated but not t
Now here's a strange one The maven-javadoc-plugin is getting a lot of
open tasks reported... because there are UNIT tests forking Maven... what
is JavadocUtil.invokeMaven doing? Should it even be doing that... or should
it be using a more correct helper from e.g. maven-invoker?
In any case we
No issue. Infra solved the last problem I have mentioned.
On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Tibor Digana wrote:
> What has changed that I am not authorized? I have updated ID to the same
> password as before.
> I thought git-wip-us repository would be r/w.
> I still have this error:
>
> Counting o
What has changed that I am not authorized? I have updated ID to the same
password as before.
I thought git-wip-us repository would be r/w.
I still have this error:
Counting objects: 68, done.
Delta compression using up to 4 threads.
Compressing objects: 100% (32/32), done.
Writing objects: 100% (6
Hi,
On 31/12/17 12:44, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
another interesting case:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-shared-utils/job/master/
when you look at each step logs from the stage view, you see no issue
but the build is marked as failed
and if you look at the unit tests marked as f
another interesting case:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-shared-utils/job/master/
when you look at each step logs from the stage view, you see no issue
but the build is marked as failed
and if you look at the unit tests marked as failed:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/
tried to analyze maven-javadoc-plugin current failure:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/job/master/
looking at logs from the stage view gives manageable log for each OS/jdk
build.
But I see 2 issues:
1. everything is marked as having test issues, when only Windows
Le dimanche 31 décembre 2017, 11:05:39 CET Stephen Connolly a écrit :
[...]
> > > what are all the open tasks links?
> >
> > was supposed to be fixed after Jenkins plugin upgrade this week
> > @Stephen is this a known issue?
>
> I may have to tweak the shared lib also. It will be Tuesday before I
> > > Le dimanche 24 décembre 2017, 13:04:56 CET Robert Scholte a écrit :
> > > > > I did the assumption that you can isolate all maven-javadoc-plugin
> > > > > commits.
> > > > > If it is for all maven-plugins or nothing, then it is a different
> > &g
0100, wrote:
> > > > > I'd suggest to try the process to a personal personal repo on GitHub
> >
> > to
> >
> > > > > see if you're able to get a better result before involving manual
> >
> > work
> >
> > > > >
t; > > from INFRA (on more than 60 repos...)
> > > >
> > > > (it's sad to see nobody try to explain what's happenning or improve
> the
> > > > documented commands, just get to a conclusion: re-do everything and
> > > > pray)
> > > >
&
Heinz Marbaise"
> > À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte"
> >
> > Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
> > Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 24/12/17 10:40, Robert Scholte
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/components/trunk/maven-plugins/mav
> >> en-> war-plugin and one for
> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/components/trunk/ no matter that
> >> actually those commits are the same - same date,
> >> author
try to explain what's happenning or improve the
> > > documented commands, just get to a conclusion: re-do everything and
> > > pray)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Hervé
> > >
> > > - Mail original -
> > >
>> Plamen Totev
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 11:54 AM, wrote:
>> > I'd suggest to try the process to a personal personal repo on GitHub to
>> > see if you're able to get a better result before involving manual work
>> > from INFRA (on more than 60 re
gt; > - Mail original -
> > De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
> > À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte"
> >
> > Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
> > Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
> >
>
nobody try to explain what's happenning or improve the
> > documented commands, just get to a conclusion: re-do everything and pray)
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Hervé
> >
> > - Mail original -
> > De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
> &
b to see
>> if you're able to get a better result before involving manual work from
>> INFRA (on more than 60 repos...)
>>
>> (it's sad to see nobody try to explain what's happenning or improve the
>> documented commands, just get to a conclusion: re-do
nd pray)
>
> Regards,
>
> Hervé
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
> À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte"
>
> Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
> Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
&g
De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte"
Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
Hi,
On 24/12/17 10:40, Robert Scholte wrote:
How about a hard reset or dropping the repo and d
Hervé
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
> À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte" <
> rfscho...@apache.org>
> Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
> Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
>
&
mands, just get to a conclusion: re-do everything and pray)
Regards,
Hervé
- Mail original -
De: "Karl Heinz Marbaise"
À: "Maven Developers List" , "Robert Scholte"
Envoyé: Dimanche 24 Décembre 2017 10:47:43
Objet: Re: [IMPORTANT] Re: Git migration next steps
H
Hi,
On 24/12/17 10:40, Robert Scholte wrote:
How about a hard reset or dropping the repo and doing it all over again?
If I correctly seen that ..there had no commit yet on the new git repos..
So I think it would be the easiest way to do as Robert suggest ...to
redo migration for those repos.
How about a hard reset or dropping the repo and doing it all over again?
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:42:36 +0100, Hervé BOUTEMY
wrote:
INFRA-15679 fixed by infra team
then I re-run migrate-plugins.sh script to split the svn2git mirror to
per-
plugin git repo
and I pushed "master2" branches fo
I still consider Mark Struberg as the Git master of our team.
Let's ping him.
Robert
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:42:36 +0100, Hervé BOUTEMY
wrote:
INFRA-15679 fixed by infra team
then I re-run migrate-plugins.sh script to split the svn2git mirror to
per-
plugin git repo
and I pushed "master2
ok, plexus added to the repos list (now we have 112 repos listed...)
if nobody objects or propose better name, I'll import the "Google repo" repo
as "maven-sources" in 72h (with additional licence headers)
Regards,
Hervé
Le mercredi 20 décembre 2017, 06:36:30 CET Olivier Lamy a écrit :
> On 19
INFRA-15679 fixed by infra team
then I re-run migrate-plugins.sh script to split the svn2git mirror to per-
plugin git repo
and I pushed "master2" branches for m-javadoc-p, m-site-p and m-pdf-p, which
were the 3 plugins which suffered from missing commits
on m-site-p and m-pdf-p, I'll cherry pick
On 19 December 2017 at 21:54, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> oh, I forgot to push (was working perfectly for me locally...): done
>
Thanks it works fine!
> should I migrate this repo to ASF?
> same name "maven-aggregator.git"? or any better idea?
> "maven-sources.git"? "maven-src.git"?
>
sounds good.
oh, I forgot to push (was working perfectly for me locally...): done
should I migrate this repo to ASF?
same name "maven-aggregator.git"? or any better idea?
"maven-sources.git"? "maven-src.git"?
and what about adding plexus repos (including modello) to the list?
Regards,
Hervé
Le mardi 19 déc
any plan to update the maven-aggregator file? :-)
On 17 December 2017 at 02:28, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> ok, I was confused by the different takes at m-javadoc-p 3.0.0
>
> yes, svn2git mirror is stuck [1] at r1815675
>
> I just opened an INFRA Jira issue
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IN
Upgrade scheduled for Dec 24th
On 17 December 2017 at 20:22, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 15 December 2017 at 08:05, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 06:34, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
>>
>>> another strang
On 15 December 2017 at 08:05, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 06:34, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
>
>> another strange thing [1]
>> - what are the many "Open tasks"?
>
>
> Bug in withMaven pipeline wrapper that Cyrille has fixed in 3.0.6 (need to
> wai
ok, I was confused by the different takes at m-javadoc-p 3.0.0
yes, svn2git mirror is stuck [1] at r1815675
I just opened an INFRA Jira issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15679
once the svn2git mirror will be updated, we'll have to re-run the split
scripts and cherry pick the mis
I was triggered by some failing unit tests, which should have been solved
in maven-javadoc-plugin-3.0.0
My last commit according to GIT was november 18th
My last commit according to SVN was december 3rd
comparing svnlog with gitlog most of these commits are lost:
moved to git
[maven-rele
looking at commits@ content https://lists.apache.org/list.html?
comm...@maven.apache.org with subject containing "maven/plugins/trunk"
and plugins svn2git mirror https://github.com/apache/maven-plugins/commits/
trunk
only 1 commit is missing: my latest commit on maven-site-plugin
(the last commit
For everybody just a warning I faced today:
If you switch to the git repos, please make sure all commits are migrated.
I noticed the latest commits of the maven-javadoc-plugin got lost.
thanks,
Robert
On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 17:06:09 +0100, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
I see we have a large number
On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 06:34, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> another strange thing [1]
> - what are the many "Open tasks"?
Bug in withMaven pipeline wrapper that Cyrille has fixed in 3.0.6 (need to
wait for infra to upgrade that plugin and restart Jenkins)
>
> - why are changes written 5 times?
There
another strange thing [1]
- what are the many "Open tasks"?
- why are changes written 5 times?
Regards
Hervé
[1]
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/maven-box/job/maven-site-plugin/job/master/changes
Le mercredi 13 décembre 2017, 05:58:28 CET Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit :
> thank you:
thank you: one less issue
a new finding: the Jira message points to the Jenkins build, why not
But it does not point to Git commit [1]
the link to the git commit is very useful to track how the fix was done, and
remains valid on a long period (which is not the case of the Jenkins build)
Is it p
On Sun 10 Dec 2017 at 09:59, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> here is a list of strange issues in CI jobs:
>
> - Doxia Sitetools is failing at checkout [1]
>
> - Maven core branches fail in maven-wip [2] while the multi-branch does not
> fail [3]: AFAIK, same Jenkins files are used, isn't it?
Ubuntu-4 wa
here is a list of strange issues in CI jobs:
- Doxia Sitetools is failing at checkout [1]
- Maven core branches fail in maven-wip [2] while the multi-branch does not
fail [3]: AFAIK, same Jenkins files are used, isn't it?
Regards,
Hervé
[1]
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/m
yes, and 83 maven-box CI jobs [1]
some CI failures are not really expected, but in general, the result is good
it's time for everybody to check his favorite plugin or shared component and
do the little fixes: the global migration is done
and it's time also to start reviewing PRs and merging: th
I see we have a large number of repos now on gitbox ;-)
On Thu 7 Dec 2017 at 07:00, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> ok, I didn't update my repo clone: now the run-its profile is activated
>
> then the plan should just confirm "it works!" :)
>
> and find which jobs are special, like maven-dist-tool (which
ok, I didn't update my repo clone: now the run-its profile is activated
then the plan should just confirm "it works!" :)
and find which jobs are special, like maven-dist-tool (which has to be
scheduled daily instead of code change, and one platform only)
Regards,
Hervé
Le mercredi 6 décembre
On Wed 6 Dec 2017 at 22:38, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> Now that we have 2 ASF Organization Jenkins jobs (one for gitbox [1] and
> one
> for git-wip: thank you Stephen) and that it looks quite successful, let's
> plan
> the next steps.
>
> Here is what I see:
> 1. removal of hand-defined Jenkins jobs
Now that we have 2 ASF Organization Jenkins jobs (one for gitbox [1] and one
for git-wip: thank you Stephen) and that it looks quite successful, let's plan
the next steps.
Here is what I see:
1. removal of hand-defined Jenkins jobs that are now duplicates
2. preparation of the 60 new empty git
52 matches
Mail list logo
