Are you referring to the fix I put in for MNG-1908?
For all my testing, this time it looks ok - no performance problems.
But I'd really like some others to test this heavily to make sure
there aren't any side effects I haven't noticed.
- Brett
On 02/11/2006, at 10:00 PM, Stephane Nicoll wr
+1 - yes please
I don't know exactly what would be included in a 2.0.5 release, but I
would like to lobby for new releases of wagon providers, etc, so that
the beta-2 version can be included. In particular, the HTTP
compression enhancements would be nice to have.
-Nathan
On 11/2/06, Kenney West
Assuming Mike Perham's testing goes OK, I would really like to see my
patch for MNG-1577 in 2.0.5. I cannot move forward with Maven 2 at all
until that issue is resolved.
Ralph
Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
2.0.4.
It's gett
On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Rollo, Dan wrote:
Are there any user instructions on how people could kick the tires
of a
release candidate AND how to back-out if needed? Given how maven
composes itself on the fly, I'm nervous about trying an RC and finding
out I wasn't really using the right ver
nd
Dan (lurking user)
-Original Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 10:49 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Releasing Maven 2.0.5
I think we just need to release what's there and pick another small set
of issues. The second
Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and
over again
due to bugs that were fixed 5 months ago.
There are 53 issues resolved for 2.0.5, and Looking at the num
The patch attached to MNG-2626 is 25 lines of code and is easily
removable. I would be disappointed if it was not be applied before
2.0.5 is released.
-b
On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:45 AM, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in
maven 2.0.4.
e been trying to get our build down to a reproducible artifact I
> can send but I'm not quite there yet.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:00 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Releas
CTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:00 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Releasing Maven 2.0.5
>
> I'm in agreement, but let's do this right - we should designate a
> build
> as an RC and put it out for some testing. If all goes well, we can
> call
+1 I've been waiting for the updates to the ant mojo stuff for a while.
On 11/2/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2 Nov 06, at 10:26 PM 2 Nov 06, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
> Right now they're both scheduled for 2.1 and seem rather complex.
>
> If you can get them fixed in a week w
On 2 Nov 06, at 10:26 PM 2 Nov 06, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Right now they're both scheduled for 2.1 and seem rather complex.
If you can get them fixed in a week we can definitely push them to
2.0.5,
otherwise we'll wait for 2.0.6, which should come out soon after
(talked to
Jason about th
Right now they're both scheduled for 2.1 and seem rather complex.
If you can get them fixed in a week we can definitely push them to 2.0.5,
otherwise we'll wait for 2.0.6, which should come out soon after (talked to
Jason about this).
Is this acceptable? We want to keep 2.0.5 pretty small and st
+1
2006/11/2, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and
over again
due to bugs that were fixed 5 months ago.
There are 53 issues resolved for 2.
/jira.codehaus.org/browse/
PLX-287
I have been trying to get our build down to a reproducible artifact I
can send but I'm not quite there yet.
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:00 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject:
On 2 Nov 06, at 8:29 PM 2 Nov 06, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
John Casey wrote:
BTW, I'm in favor of the RC staging, then a vote for that binary.
Yes, me too.
I want to clarify something:
I wasn't suggesting we release 2.0.5 immediately; I didn't even
talk about how/what to release, just tha
been trying to get our build down to a reproducible artifact I
can send but I'm not quite there yet.
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:00 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Releasing Maven 2.0.5
I'm in agree
On Thu, November 2, 2006 4:59 pm, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
> How do we proceed in deciding what to keep and what to move to 2.0.6?
> Bulk change all open issues and move them, then move back some issues
> mentioned
> on this thread and others?
+1.
Regards,
Graham
--
---
John Casey wrote:
BTW, I'm in favor of the RC staging, then a vote for that binary.
Yes, me too.
I want to clarify something:
I wasn't suggesting we release 2.0.5 immediately; I didn't even talk about
how/what to release, just that we cut down the number of issues planned
for 2.0.5 and
Not a developer, but a quick question on the topic: aren't these
fixes for a large part in plugins, and not in the core?
(As a user, hooray for the release schedule, BTW).
On 2 Nov 2006, at 15:26, Wendell Beckwith wrote:
I'm all +1 for more frequent releases too. However, this issue
goes
On Do, November 2, 2006 15:09, Mike Perham wrote:
> MNG-2340 and MNG-1577 are both on my must fix list before release. I
> still need to test the latest patch for 1577.
>
> mike
>
What about MNG-2646 ? I opened it just yesterday. The attached patch needs
an expert's review, of course, but fixes
BTW, I'm in favor of the RC staging, then a vote for that binary.
-john
On 11/2/06, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sounds good to me. +1.
-john
On 11/2/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
> 2
Sounds good to me. +1.
-john
On 11/2/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and
over again
due to bugs that were fixed 5 months ago.
T
I'm all +1 for more frequent releases too. However, this issue goes to the
core of an issue I brought up previously where maven should publish a build
milestone/release schedule similar to eclipse. For example, no one is
asking the Eclipse platform guys and gals to please make a release because
MNG-2340 and MNG-1577 are both on my must fix list before release. I
still need to test the latest patch for 1577.
mike
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Definitely +1!
I am also agree with Brett's comment.
Moreover, we need to review issues before and I am pretty sure that we
could close some of them (specially doc). I will investigate.
Cheers,
Vincent
2006/11/2, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm in agreement, but let's do this right - we
double-plus 1!
On 11/2/06, John Tolentino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's my +1 :-)
On 11/2/06, Stephen Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know it's lame to throw out a pet issue that's unfixed, but I'm
> going to do it anyway because it's been such a big problem for me.
> http://jira.cod
Here's my +1 :-)
On 11/2/06, Stephen Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know it's lame to throw out a pet issue that's unfixed, but I'm
going to do it anyway because it's been such a big problem for me.
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2340 is a critical regression
issue that was introduced
I know it's lame to throw out a pet issue that's unfixed, but I'm
going to do it anyway because it's been such a big problem for me.
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2340 is a critical regression
issue that was introduced in 2.0.4 that has made using mvn
eclipse:eclipse (or the Netbeans plugin)
a big +1, we should definitively try to release more often
fabrizio
On 11/2/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven 2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and over
again
due
+1, especially for the SNAPSHOT download issue.
Stéphane
On 11/2/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven 2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and over
again
due to bugs that
I'm in agreement, but let's do this right - we should designate a
build as an RC and put it out for some testing. If all goes well, we
can call a vote.
Thanks for pushing this forward Kenney.
Cheers,
Brett
On 02/11/2006, at 8:45 PM, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several user
Mark Hobson wrote:
+1, more frequent releases the better.
Absolutely - and more frequent releases of plugins too.
It's becoming increasingly hard to "sell in" the maven idea to projects
due to long-lasting outstanding bugs (or outstanding releases).
I think this would be a lot easier if rele
On Thu, November 2, 2006 11:45 am, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
> I feel that there are enough critical issues resolved for 2.0.5 to warrant
> a release. Could we start planning a 2.0.6 release and move most of the
> open
> issues from 2.0.5 to 2.0.6?
>
> Here's my +1.
+1.
Regards,
Graham
--
-
Yes! Please more frequent releases :-)
+1
--jason
On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:45 AM, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in
maven 2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over
and over again
due to bugs that we
Any chances for MNG-2305 (only first active proxy considered/used)?
Greetings
Franz
Kenney Westerhof schrieb:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven
2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over
and over again
due to bugs tha
+1, more frequent releases the better.
Mark
On 02/11/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven 2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and over
again
due to bugs that were fixed
Hi,
I've talked to several users in the past period about issues in maven 2.0.4.
It's getting frustrating to see users having the same problems over and over
again
due to bugs that were fixed 5 months ago.
There are 53 issues resolved for 2.0.5, and Looking at the number of open issues
for 2.0
37 matches
Mail list logo
