Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 20-Jun-08, at 11:54 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
Brett Porter wrote:
On 21/06/2008, at 2:54 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
On 20-Jun-08, at 11:54 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
digging through the c
On 21/06/2008, at 2:54 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
digging through the c
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
digging through the code. I'm specifically interested in how
version ra
On 19/06/2008, at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Paul Gier wrote:
Oleg, are there any overview type docs on the wiki of how the new
resolver will work? I'd like to see an overview before I start
digging through the code. I'm specifically interested in how
version ranges are handled in
8, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once
that is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT
3.0 alpha 1.
MNG-3456, 3617, 3599, 3423, 3352, are on my li
riginal Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18,
2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once
that is made configurable, there ar
code. That
said, I would expect Oleg or Jason to push the release forward given
that they know the full status.
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi
would expect Oleg or Jason to push the release forward given
that they know the full status.
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixe
On 18-Jun-08, at 8:29 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
3.0-alpha-1: released as is, with or without those few fixes I was
looking at getting in.
3.0-alpha-X: later introduce the mercury and SAT based stuff as an
optional component
3.0: when all the above is stable and the resolu
Brett Porter wrote:
On 19/06/2008, at 11:29 AM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
3.0-alpha-1: released as is, with or without those few fixes I was
looking at getting in.
3.0-alpha-X: later introduce the mercury and SAT based stuff as an
optional component
3.0: when all the above is
On 19/06/2008, at 11:29 AM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
Brett Porter wrote:
3.0-alpha-1: released as is, with or without those few fixes I was
looking at getting in.
3.0-alpha-X: later introduce the mercury and SAT based stuff as an
optional component
3.0: when all the above is stable and the resol
Brett Porter wrote:
3.0-alpha-1: released as is, with or without those few fixes I was looking at
getting in.
3.0-alpha-X: later introduce the mercury and SAT based stuff as an optional
component
3.0: when all the above is stable and the resolution method is selectable
Is that how everyone se
On 18-Jun-08, at 5:12 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
SAT based resolver in the sandbox branch works differently from the
old one, and as such - it may break a few builds that rely on bugs
in the old resolver.
I think we know it will break builds that rely on bugs in the old
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June
18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once
that is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT
3.0 alpha 1.
sday, June 18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once that
is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT 3.0 alpha
1.
MNG-3456, 3617, 3599, 3423, 3352, ar
On 19/06/2008, at 8:36 AM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Are there additional tests we could write today?
For SAT based resolver we need to
1). proof-run it against big artifacts (like maven-core, for
instance) and make sure it resolves all the transitives correctly.
Ideally - run against a represen
Dan Fabulich wrote:
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
SAT based resolver in the sandbox branch works differently from the
old one, and as such - it may break a few builds that rely on bugs in
the old resolver.
I think we know it will break builds that rely on bugs in the old
resolver, right?
Yes.
An
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
SAT based resolver in the sandbox branch works differently from the old one,
and as such - it may break a few builds that rely on bugs in the old
resolver.
I think we know it will break builds that rely on bugs in the old
resolver, right?
And we need to test is more th
would expect Oleg or Jason to push the release forward given
that they know the full status.
-Original Message-
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixe
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:24 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: maven artifact issues before release
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once that
is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT 3.0 alpha
1.
MNG-3456,
On 18-Jun-08, at 10:23 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once
that is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT
3.0 alpha 1.
MNG-3456, 3617, 3599, 3423, 3352, are on my list to check next
as they are artifact-3
Hi,
I've fixed the code to make double deployment fail properly. Once that
is made configurable, there are no open issues for MARTIFACT 3.0 alpha
1.
MNG-3456, 3617, 3599, 3423, 3352, are on my list to check next as
they are artifact-3.0 related. I might be short on time for the next
24 matches
Mail list logo
