/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide
&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=11139&fixfor=
14138
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 3:31 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: RE: [Pre-Vote]
ch 19, 2008 11:42 AM
To: Daniel Kulp; dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: RE: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
>Well, the auto-update of the archetype-plugin certainly has caused a
LOT
>of issues lately. Would that be considered one of your "commonly used
>utilities"?
Normally y
There's already a jira for it, scheduled for 2.1 as it introduces new elements
to the poms.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of nicolas de loof
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:07 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] re
I agree this should be fixed, as there is no section
in POM to force the report plugin versions and the element is
optional in .
Nico.
2008/3/20, Geoffrey De Smet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> The reporting section ignores pluginManagement, which is said to be a
> feature, but IMHO it violates the p
The reporting section ignores pluginManagement, which is said to be a
feature, but IMHO it violates the principle of least suprise and it's a bug.
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
Jörg Schaible schreef:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nicolas,
I won't speak for Brian, but I thought his intention
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> nicolas,
>
> I won't speak for Brian, but I thought his intention was to lock down
> plug-ins that only affect the build cycle.
Shouldn't the generated reports of a release also be reproducable? However,
anone noticed that a plugin with a locked version in the pluginMa
2008/3/19, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This seems a little weird. Why are we packaging up the entire site and
> > deploying it in the assembly?
>
>
> I don't think it should go inside the Maven distribution, bu
ginal Message-
> From: Vincent Siveton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 6:42 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Don't forget to call the include-site profile to inc
Ah yes I did miss that.I've been seeing a combination of plugins not being
locked down and in other threads people using the 2.0.9 snapshot having
problems with their plugins and didn't see that you had locked them down
specifically. I also just now see in the previous thread why they are being
loc
Sejal,
You must have missed the previous responses that said that only plug-ins
that affect the build cycle will be locked down. So the list below is
incorrect. Nicolas was making a comment/suggestion, not stating what *is*
locked down.
For the record, this is from the Maven 2.0.9 POM (minus conf
Huh? This wasn't a vote and I restaged it already
-Original Message-
From: Sejal Patel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 5:41 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Cc: Daniel Kulp
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
Not to be a party pooper but given al
anything that has been released less than 30 days again
> unless there is a good reason. We don't want to find out about
> regressions by locking down on a new version.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 20
een released less than 30 days again
unless there is a good reason. We don't want to find out about
regressions by locking down on a new version.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 11:33 AM
To: dev@maven.apache.org
Cc: Br
er the intent.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of nicolas de loof
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 11:18 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
>
> I notice some official m
including every single plugin in here, it was never the intent.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of nicolas de loof
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 11:18 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
I notice some offici
Yes, the default build lifecycle not everything.
On 19-Mar-08, at 8:20 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
nicolas,
I won't speak for Brian, but I thought his intention was to lock down
plug-ins that only affect the build cycle.
Paul
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM, nicolas de loof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
nicolas,
I won't speak for Brian, but I thought his intention was to lock down
plug-ins that only affect the build cycle.
Paul
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM, nicolas de loof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I notice some official maven plugin don't have fixed version in the
> super-POM :
>
> mav
I notice some official maven plugin don't have fixed version in the
super-POM :
maven-archetype-plugin
maven-checkstyle-plugin
maven-eclipse-plugin
maven-idea-plugin
maven-jxr-plugin
maven-invoker-plugin
maven-one-plugin
maven-patch-plugin
maven-pmd-plugin
maven-projecthelp-plugin
maven-remote-res
TED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 6:42 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Don't forget to call the include-site profile to include the site
> documentation in the release (MNG-3360)
>
> Cheers,
&g
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This seems a little weird. Why are we packaging up the entire site and
> deploying it in the assembly?
I don't think it should go inside the Maven distribution, but a
separate docs assembly would be nice to have.
What is
ch 18, 2008 6:42 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
Hi Brian,
Don't forget to call the include-site profile to include the site
documentation in the release (MNG-3360)
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/3/18, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The list of fixes
Sure, that'd be great.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Paul Benedict
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:19 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
I'd like to contribute a table to the 2.0.9 rel
This seems a little weird. Why are we packaging up the entire site and
deploying it in the assembly?
-Original Message-
From: Vincent Siveton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 6:42 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [Pre-Vote] release maven 2.0.9
Hi Brian
I'd like to contribute a table to the 2.0.9 release under the "issues that
may affect build" section detailing the defaulted plugins and versions. Can
I just attach it to MNG-3395?
Paul
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Vincent Siveton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> Don't forget to ca
+1 tested on the archetype plugin build.
Raphaël
2008/3/18, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The list of fixes in this release is substantial. See release notes at
> the bottom. High level changes are: locking down the plugins in the
> super pom, new import scope, new toolchain support, nati
Hi Brian,
Don't forget to call the include-site profile to include the site
documentation in the release (MNG-3360)
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/3/18, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The list of fixes in this release is substantial. See release notes at
> the bottom. High level changes are: lockin
26 matches
Mail list logo
