Thanks Robert!
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 04:21, Robert Scholte wrote:
> The master of maven-javadoc-plugin on the ASF Jenkins is fixed.
> Root cause was a change to the settings.xml of the Maven installation.
> I'd asked INFRA to add a mirror for central to the https connection for
> all Maven inst
The master of maven-javadoc-plugin on the ASF Jenkins is fixed.
Root cause was a change to the settings.xml of the Maven installation.
I'd asked INFRA to add a mirror for central to the https connection for all
Maven installations before 3.2.3
By accident 3.2.5 on Ubuntu was patched as well.
With
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 7:16 AM Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
> failures, which lets much more serious bugs creep in unnoticed.
> >
>
> ok no worries.
> So do you want to be volunteer try to understand the problem on this node
> and fix the problem with ASF infra folks?
>
Robert already said he was worki
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 21:07, Elliotte Rusty Harold
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:56 PM Olivier Lamy wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Robert
> > Anyway as the build only fail for jdk7 with mvn 3.2.5 on a particular
> node
> > of the asf machines.
> > I build that perfectly with same jdk/mvn
> > So
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:56 PM Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
> Thanks Robert
> Anyway as the build only fail for jdk7 with mvn 3.2.5 on a particular node
> of the asf machines.
> I build that perfectly with same jdk/mvn
> So we cannot really consider this as blocker...
>
I absolutely do consider tha
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:51 AM Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Do we really want to use OracleJdk as a source of truth???
>
For Java 7, probably not, at least unless we can switch to a later
patch release. I'm hitting an unrelated issue in the
maven-changes-plugin that stems from TLS 1.2 on the old Oracl
this branch should be fixed now as well
It was failing on Jenkins ASF as again we hit a bug fixed in OpenJdk but
not reported in OracleJdk... (I simply disabled the test)
We are back to the famous "It works on my machine" :)
Do we really want to use OracleJdk as a source of truth???
On Wed, 11 M
ok the branch MJAVADOC-610 has been created from a old master some code was
missing especially some fixes regarding it test (guava apidocs relocation
for MJAVADOC-555_link..)
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 09:56, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Thanks Robert
> Anyway as the build only fail for jdk7 with mvn 3.2.5
Thanks Robert
Anyway as the build only fail for jdk7 with mvn 3.2.5 on a particular node
of the asf machines.
I build that perfectly with same jdk/mvn
So we cannot really consider this as blocker...
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 05:14, Robert Scholte wrote:
> I think I found the root cause. Give m
I think I found the root cause. Give me some time to fix this with INFRA
On 10-3-2020 12:23:34, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
This is from Jenkins:
[INFO] -
[INFO] Build Summary:
[INFO] Passed: 51, Failed: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 18
[INFO] ---
This is from Jenkins:
[INFO] -
[INFO] Build Summary:
[INFO] Passed: 51, Failed: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 18
[INFO] -
[ERROR] The following builds failed:
[ERROR] * MJAVADOC-338_downloadSources/pom.xml
I'll see if I can dig up some more logs on this. In the meantime as
Robert pointed out, the CI for this plugin is broken/red:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/
IMHO, getting that to blue is a prerequisite for a release. This
plugin is not currently in a releasable
Hi
The stack trace is truncated in your email.
Can you paste the logs to a gist so I can try looking at it.
There are some old flaky tests relying on having an internet connection.
But I don't want to fix this now..
Actually I need a release for the jetty project which is a bit stucked to
release
I tested using maven 3.2.5 and jdk 1.7.0_80 and could not reproduce the
issue.
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 17:21, Robert Scholte wrote:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/ [
> https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/] master
> is broken.
>
> It
I see two test failures locally:
[ERROR] Failures:
[ERROR] JavadocJarTest.testContinueIfFailOnErrorIsFalse:170
[ERROR] JavadocReportTest.testNewline:880 Doesn't handle correctly
newline for string parameters. See options and packages files.
[ERROR] Errors:
[ERROR]
FixJavadocMojoTest.testFix
There are five open PRs in the repo. It would be nice to review and
respond to them. One, I think, can be closed based on the discussion.
One is not ready (needs a test). I need to look at the other three.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 2:26 AM Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
> Hi
> I'd like to make a javadoc plug
Dependencies in this project look quite out of date. We should
probably update the parent POM, doxia, possibly the http client, and
several other things first. This shouldn't take long once the CI is
fixed.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 2:26 AM Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
> Hi
> I'd like to make a javadoc plu
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/
[https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-box/job/maven-javadoc-plugin/] master is
broken.
It looks like a false positive, JDK7 + Linux is tested with other Maven
versions and these succeed.
If it is happening on the same node, try re
+1, they can be fixed later IMHO
Le lun. 9 mars 2020 à 07:26, Olivier Lamy a écrit :
> Hi
> I'd like to make a javadoc plugin release.
> 2 issues left ATM but I can move them to next version.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Olivier
>
I tracked down the issue and found that it is caused by MPIR-223
regards,
Hervé
Le jeudi 28 avril 2011, Dennis Lundberg a écrit :
> Hervé BOUTEMY skrev 2011-04-27 23:39:
> > could the first point be the same as MJAVADOC-302?
> > I'll try to have a look.
>
> I looked at that issue and it might b
Hervé BOUTEMY skrev 2011-04-27 23:39:
> could the first point be the same as MJAVADOC-302?
> I'll try to have a look.
I looked at that issue and it might be the same problem. There isn't
much info in that issue though.
>
> About releasing 2.8, I was hoping to make a release shortly since
> MJAVA
could the first point be the same as MJAVADOC-302?
I'll try to have a look.
About releasing 2.8, I was hoping to make a release shortly since MJAVADOC-284
is known as really blocking: the question is whether we try to fix other issues
before or if I should start the release process ASAP
Regards
Dennis,
I noticed similar problems when someone tried to release the cobertura-m-p-2.5.
He rolled back the release, made a jira-issue[1], changed the configuration of
the m-javadoc-p[2] and retried the release.
I didn't have time to investigate this yet (this should be fixed in the
mojo-parent
I'm on it.
-Original Message-
From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 12:49 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Javadoc plugin
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, Brett. I'm tryin
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, Brett. I'm trying it now on Leopard with this workaround.
Vincent and/or Brian, it's all yours! (No luck with Brett's
workaround or my attempts to further edit the command line.)
--
Wendy
--
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is how I worked around the Leopard things until the release
> plugin allows you to turn off --non-interactive:
>
>
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/2008/02/25/working-around-non-interactive-problems-in-leopards-sub
Cool, I can be the backup if you have trouble.
-Original Message-
From: Vincent Siveton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 9:29 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Javadoc plugin
Hi Benjamin,
No problem.
BTW I will try to get the release out this week end
Hi Benjamin,
No problem.
BTW I will try to get the release out this week end.
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/3/8, Benjamin Bentmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > I'm not having any luck staging the Javadoc plugin for a 2.4 release
>
>
> I just added a patch for MJAVADOC-162 which was originally planned for
> I'm not having any luck staging the Javadoc plugin for a 2.4 release
I just added a patch for MJAVADOC-162 which was originally planned for this
release. If it's not too late, it would be cool to see it applied.
Benjamin
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Javadoc-plugin
On 08/03/2008, at 4:42 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
I'm not having any luck staging the Javadoc plugin for a 2.4 release,
and I'm out of time. If someone else has time to do it, feel free...
(I can't do releases on Leopard due to a strange svn bug, and I've
chased problem after problem doing it fro
Thanks guys, will do this tonight. Arrghh, mvn install, not deploy, I don't
how I got those confused!
-aps
On Feb 11, 2008 5:56 PM, Vincent Siveton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> More comments inside...
>
> 2008/2/11, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Alexander Sack wrote:
> > > Hey
Hi,
More comments inside...
2008/2/11, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alexander Sack wrote:
> > Hey Vincent:
> > No problem. I would love to. I have a really really stupid question.
> >
> > What I've done is:
> >
> > 1) Checked out the 2.0.x trunk
>
> This is not necessary, you can use
Alexander Sack wrote:
Hey Vincent:
No problem. I would love to. I have a really really stupid question.
What I've done is:
1) Checked out the 2.0.x trunk
This is not necessary, you can use a regular Maven release.
2) Built a new maven-javadoc-plugin
3) Used mvn deploy:deploy-file to in
Hey Vincent:
No problem. I would love to. I have a really really stupid question.
What I've done is:
1) Checked out the 2.0.x trunk
2) Built a new maven-javadoc-plugin
3) Used mvn deploy:deploy-file to install it on my test machine
4) Change my project's pom file that uses javadoc to includ
Alexander,
Please open an issue, and if you want propose a patch :)
I guess that the pattern used should also work with -J-version
Vincent
2008/2/10, Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Exactly. The use of "-fullversion" is really for internal use as per
> Benjamin and typically the format is
Exactly. The use of "-fullversion" is really for internal use as per
Benjamin and typically the format is "java version " or something
of that elk which is very easy to parse. Again, I would rely on the
javadocVersion tag as a backup.
Thanks!
-aps
On Feb 10, 2008 3:22 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <[EM
Is there any reason again why it can't use "-version?"
-version gives a lot of unuseful informations.
The unuseful information should not be a problem for the version parsing. On
the other hand, "-fullversion" is "for internal use only" according to [0]
so it seems wise to switch to "-version
2008/2/10, Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Wayne/Devlist:
> I guess this should be on the developers list so I'm switching gears (please
> include my email in any response since I'm not on the dev list yet):
>
> When the javadoc plugin attempts to grab the javadoc binaries version in the
>
Hi Wayne/Devlist:
I guess this should be on the developers list so I'm switching gears (please
include my email in any response since I'm not on the dev list yet):
When the javadoc plugin attempts to grab the javadoc binaries version in the
JavadocUtil.getJavadocVersion() it attempts to execute:
Hi Rob,
No timeframe was schedule yet. We need to review issues left for 2.4.
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/1/4, Robert Golkosky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello -
>
> I was wondering if there was an expected timeframe for the 2.4 release
> of the javadoc plugin. Jira doesn't show any open defects schedule
Hi Vincent,
in Maven 2.0.x, it is not possible to add a dependency to a plugin in the
reporting section. And if you put it in the pluginManagement section, this
doesn't work either. (see bug MNG-1931)
So that's why I don't see a solution to that... :-(
Cheers,
Fabrice.
On 9/19/07, Vincent Sivet
Hi Fabrice,
PLXUTILS-34 is included in p-u:1.4.6, so try to add it as dependency
in the javadoc-plugin.
Cheers,
Vincent
2007/9/19, Fabrice Bellingard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've just updated some projects that now use Maven 2.0.7 along with the
> Javadoc plugin 2.3, and now my buil
Hi Daniel,
I'll take a look at your problem.
Arnaud
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Envoyé : samedi 9 octobre 2004 13:28
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Javadoc plugin problems
>
> Hi folks,
> I've added a component (i18n) to the co
> > > Do we really care about sourceModifications? Should we generate it for
> > > everything, or will this double up?
> >
> > I never used sourceModifications in my projects. I'm not sure that it is very
> > usefull to use it
> in the javadoc plugin.
>
> Where sourcemods is handy is for generate
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:03:06 +0200, Arnaud Heritier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Do we really care about sourceModifications? Should we generate it for
> > everything, or will this double up?
>
> I never used sourceModifications in my projects. I'm not sure that it is very
> usefull to u
>
> Do we really care about sourceModifications? Should we generate it for
> everything, or will this double up?
I never used sourceModifications in my projects. I'm not sure that it is very usefull
to use it in the javadoc plugin.
>
> That check can also check for the existence of JDK 1.4+ w
Do we really care about sourceModifications? Should we generate it for
everything, or will this double up?
That check can also check for the existence of JDK 1.4+ where the bugs in
javadoc are fixed IIRC.
- Brett
Quoting Heritier Arnaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello guys,
>
> Several weeks
47 matches
Mail list logo
