Ok, I'm tracking this here:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4306
Jesse is going to start implementing this. Sonatype will sponsor the
work and Jesse will implement this on behalf of Webtide so if anyone
has a problem with this let me know.
On 13-Aug-09, at 10:18 AM, Brian Fox wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> John,
>
> What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
>
Currently the lightweight impl handles NTLMv2 and does a better job
caching the data when the repository asks for authentication (this one
uses Sun code). The Sun
[mailto:jvan...@sonatype.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 6:34 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Replacing old Wagons in Maven 3.0 with the Jetty-client based Wagon
On 12-Aug-09, at 5:37 PM, Jason Chaffee wrote:
> It was just yesterday that I was just have a conversation with a
>
ed, are
great.
Kind regards,
Jason
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:br...@porterclan.net] On Behalf Of Brett
Porter
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 5:28 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Replacing old Wagons in Maven 3.0 with the Jetty-client
based Wagon
On 1
On 12-Aug-09, at 5:38 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 8:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Also I think this is a function of not being able to specify the
wagon implementation via URL properly in 2.x. So we'll just find a
more normal way to plug in an implementation properly as the co
On 12-Aug-09, at 5:27 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 8:10 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features ac
] On Behalf Of Brett Porter
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 5:28 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Replacing old Wagons in Maven 3.0 with the Jetty-client based Wagon
On 12/08/2009, at 8:10 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>>
>&
On 12/08/2009, at 8:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Also I think this is a function of not being able to specify the
wagon implementation via URL properly in 2.x. So we'll just find a
more normal way to plug in an implementation properly as the core in
3.x is fully dynamic and can load compone
On 12/08/2009, at 8:10 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
They reall
On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
They really don't do anything more than the underlying httpcl
On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
They really don't do anything more than the underlying httpcl
On 12-Aug-09, at 3:43 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
They really don't do anything more than the underlying httpcl
On 12/08/2009, at 5:58 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
John,
Not John, but I like to think I do a good impression :)
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
They really don't do anything more than the underlying httpclient /
JDK implementations. HTTP Headers, conne
John,
What's the range of features across the two http Wagon's right now?
I assume in some cases we need the functionality of one versus the
other so I would just like to improve the Jetty-client based Wagon and
fix up what's required there, add any functionality and toss the other
two. I
14 matches
Mail list logo
