Re: Planning for 2.0.10

2008-04-09 Thread Arnaud HERITIER
I'm also interested if we can try to fix this one : http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MECLIPSE-394 If we can validate it by reproducing it with another plugin we can suppose that it i related to the core (I don't see how i can be a bug in the plugin). (I already had this bug but I didn't yet take the

RE: Planning for 2.0.10

2008-04-09 Thread Brian E. Fox
>It essentially renders maven useless behind a corporate firewall because >proxying is applied globally in maven - and nonProxyHosts are not taken >into account. Someplace with a corporate firewall most likely needs a repo manager anyway, which should handle this without blinking. >Even by usin

Re: Planning for 2.0.10

2008-04-09 Thread David J. M. Karlsen
Brian E. Fox skrev: Now that 2.0.9 is essentially behind us, I think the focus for the next release needs to continue on preventing new regressions and stomping out the old ones. This should take precedence over new features and other "nice to haves" as we still have a significant user base stuck

RE: Planning for 2.0.10

2008-04-09 Thread Brian E. Fox
1:13 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: Planning for 2.0.10 Sounds good. I think we should consider MNG-3160 - to get all the integration tests that have been disabled for one reason or another working again. - Brett On 10/04/2008, at 2:51 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote: > Now that 2.0.9 i

Re: Planning for 2.0.10

2008-04-09 Thread Brett Porter
Sounds good. I think we should consider MNG-3160 - to get all the integration tests that have been disabled for one reason or another working again. - Brett On 10/04/2008, at 2:51 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote: Now that 2.0.9 is essentially behind us, I think the focus for the next release need