You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> on 2012/09/12 11:27:45 UTC
Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Howdy,
there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
Thanks,
~t~
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com>.
the usual operations like indexing local repo, downloding remote index
and searching appear all working properly.
I had to change a place or two to call aquire+release methods on the context.
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
>> Milos,
>>
>> yes I think it is, since all of it is _removed_. See issue
>> https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-57
>> and related commits.
>>
>> Only integration I tested is... Nexus. So, you could give it a spin in NB
>> for example...
>
> I'm right at it, however the issue reported is fairly random (and
> rarely occurring) so the most likely result of my testing will be just
> sanity check confirmation..
>
> Milos
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~t~
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> hey,
>>>
>>> do you believe https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-52 is fixed in
>>> 5.0?
>>>
>>> Milos
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Howdy,
>>> >
>>> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
>>> >
>>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>>> >
>>> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > ~t~
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Milos,
>
> yes I think it is, since all of it is _removed_. See issue
> https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-57
> and related commits.
>
> Only integration I tested is... Nexus. So, you could give it a spin in NB
> for example...
I'm right at it, however the issue reported is fairly random (and
rarely occurring) so the most likely result of my testing will be just
sanity check confirmation..
Milos
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> hey,
>>
>> do you believe https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-52 is fixed in
>> 5.0?
>>
>> Milos
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Howdy,
>> >
>> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
>> >
>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>> >
>> >
>> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>> >
>> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > ~t~
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Milos,
yes I think it is, since all of it is _removed_. See issue
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-57
and related commits.
Only integration I tested is... Nexus. So, you could give it a spin in NB
for example...
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hey,
>
> do you believe https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-52 is fixed in
> 5.0?
>
> Milos
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
> wrote:
> > Howdy,
> >
> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
> >
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
> >
> >
> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
> >
> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ~t~
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com>.
hey,
do you believe https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-52 is fixed in 5.0?
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>
>
> So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>
> Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Thats' good :)
But seriously, there are two related commits (one doing it, and one undoing
it). All I wanted it to simply cover those and have a history for that
change in JIRA too....
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
> Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
> could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
> this relaese to think this has been introduced.
>
> /Anders
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
> wrote:
> > Howdy,
> >
> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
> >
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
> >
> >
> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
> >
> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ~t~
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Mark H. Wood <mw...@iupui.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
> > On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
> > >> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
> > >> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
> > >>
> > >
> > > Simple.
> > >
> > > Two reasons actually.
> > >
> > > Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers and
> being
> > > obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the
> world)...
> > >
> > > 1. Cost.
> > >
> > > 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned with
> > > function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short, if
> it
> > > works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
> > >
> > > Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one that is
> > > *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due to
> the
> > > support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
> > > versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue
> paying
> > > the huge support costs.
> > >
> > > But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is not a
> > > cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
> >
> > I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
> until
> > it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
> > and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
> > browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
> > to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
> > invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart and
> > then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>
> I think this happens because the money you spend on upgrading and the
> money you save because of it are in two different pots. If you look
> at the way budgeting works, you might find that the current behavior
> makes sense -- assuming that you accept that the way budgeting works,
> makes sense. :-/
>
Absolutely true!
Especially when support is outsourced (even internally) an you have
on-shore/off-shore teams.
Thanks for reminding me of that.
-Chris
> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real technology
> > leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
> > pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
> > Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
> >
> > imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
> > downloads pages..
>
> Tell the distro.s. Gentoo still has Maven 3 keyworded on all arches,
> and Gentoo is one of the bleeding-edge, daily-updating distro.s. I'll
> be using M3 for production work the day after they take the ~amd64
> keyword off it.
>
> --
> Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@IUPUI.Edu
> Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking whether people are
> smart.
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Manfred Moser <ma...@mosabuam.com>.
On Thu, September 13, 2012 6:52 am, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
>> I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
>> until
>> it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
>> and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
>> browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
>> to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
>> invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart
>> and
>> then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>
> I think this happens because the money you spend on upgrading and the
> money you save because of it are in two different pots. If you look
> at the way budgeting works, you might find that the current behavior
> makes sense -- assuming that you accept that the way budgeting works,
> makes sense. :-/
Most of the time budgeting is also short sighted and without leadership..
so I dont accept that it makes sense .. sorry ;-)
>> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real
>> technology
>> leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
>> pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
>> Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
>>
>> imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
>> downloads pages..
>
> Tell the distro.s. Gentoo still has Maven 3 keyworded on all arches,
> and Gentoo is one of the bleeding-edge, daily-updating distro.s. I'll
> be using M3 for production work the day after they take the ~amd64
> keyword off it.
Dont use the package supplied by the distro then. Use the upstream release.
manfred
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Aleksandar Kurtakov <ak...@redhat.com>.
When one thinks of Linux distros and Java you would better consider Fedora - Maven 3 is there for the last 1.5 years.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark H. Wood" <mw...@IUPUI.Edu>
> To: dev@maven.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 4:52:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
> > On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar
> > > <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the
> > >> Java
> > >> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for
> > >> those on
> > >> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide
> > >> libraries
> > >>
> > >
> > > Simple.
> > >
> > > Two reasons actually.
> > >
> > > Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers
> > > and being
> > > obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the
> > > world)...
> > >
> > > 1. Cost.
> > >
> > > 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned
> > > with
> > > function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In
> > > short, if it
> > > works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
> > >
> > > Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one
> > > that is
> > > *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due
> > > to the
> > > support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the
> > > older
> > > versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue
> > > paying
> > > the huge support costs.
> > >
> > > But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is
> > > not a
> > > cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
> >
> > I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep
> > waiting until
> > it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and
> > there
> > and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime
> > environments,
> > browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be
> > able
> > to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to
> > constantly
> > invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall
> > apart and
> > then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>
> I think this happens because the money you spend on upgrading and the
> money you save because of it are in two different pots. If you look
> at the way budgeting works, you might find that the current behavior
> makes sense -- assuming that you accept that the way budgeting works,
> makes sense. :-/
>
> > So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real
> > technology
> > leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing
> > the
> > pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with
> > deprecating
> > Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
> >
> > imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
> > downloads pages..
>
> Tell the distro.s. Gentoo still has Maven 3 keyworded on all arches,
> and Gentoo is one of the bleeding-edge, daily-updating distro.s.
> I'll
> be using M3 for production work the day after they take the ~amd64
> keyword off it.
>
> --
> Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@IUPUI.Edu
> Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking whether people
> are smart.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by "Mark H. Wood" <mw...@IUPUI.Edu>.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
> On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
> >> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
> >> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
> >>
> >
> > Simple.
> >
> > Two reasons actually.
> >
> > Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers and being
> > obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the world)...
> >
> > 1. Cost.
> >
> > 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned with
> > function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short, if it
> > works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
> >
> > Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one that is
> > *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due to the
> > support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
> > versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue paying
> > the huge support costs.
> >
> > But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is not a
> > cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
>
> I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting until
> it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
> and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
> browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
> to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
> invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart and
> then being forced to large costly upgrades.
I think this happens because the money you spend on upgrading and the
money you save because of it are in two different pots. If you look
at the way budgeting works, you might find that the current behavior
makes sense -- assuming that you accept that the way budgeting works,
makes sense. :-/
> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real technology
> leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
> pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
> Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
>
> imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
> downloads pages..
Tell the distro.s. Gentoo still has Maven 3 keyworded on all arches,
and Gentoo is one of the bleeding-edge, daily-updating distro.s. I'll
be using M3 for production work the day after they take the ~amd64
keyword off it.
--
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@IUPUI.Edu
Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking whether people are smart.
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Yes, and sorry again for a bit of hectic handling of this.
After I triggered the vote on Friday, over the weekend I realised I want
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-62
in too, but was unable to sit in front of my machine (kids and family
programme). As MINDEXER-62 it introduces a new artifact (indexer-cli), I
did not want to do that in a "dot release" (subsequent of 5.x) or to defer
it to 6.x even, as I already had the changes in my own fork.
After reading the page on URL Stuart pasted, I came to same conclusion as
he did, that I as "individual serving as release manager" am able to
withdraw the vote, even if it looks strange, as the voting passed. As
Olivier stated, that's not "nice" to people who invested time in testing
before putting votes, but I have to emphasise, that MINDEXER-62 is merely
about _move out_ of two CLI related classes -- anyway "dead code", when
indexer-core embedded and used as library -- no other code change happened.
So, I'd say that what Milos tested in Netbeans should still stand for
example.
Again, am sorry for this mess.
Thanks,
~t~
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Stuart McCulloch <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 Sep 2012, at 00:42, Chris Graham wrote:
>
> > If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
> > that you could.
>
> FWIW, from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:
>
> "Generally the community will cancel the release vote if anyone
> identifies serious problems, but in most cases the ultimate decision, lies
> with the individual serving as release manager."
>
> This suggests whoever is serving as release manager can decide to cancel
> and re-spin a given release ( it also says "The specifics of the process
> may vary from project to project"... )
>
> > -Chris
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Tamás Cservenák <tamas@cservenak.net
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
> >> confusion.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> ~t~
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
> >>> And PASSED !!!
> >>>
> >>> IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
> >>>
> >>> 2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
> >>>> Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
> >>>>
> >>>> I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
> >>>> all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> ~t~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Olivier Lamy
> >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
> >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
Ok. Fair enough. :-)
-Chris
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Stuart McCulloch <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 Sep 2012, at 00:42, Chris Graham wrote:
>
> > If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
> > that you could.
>
> FWIW, from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:
>
> "Generally the community will cancel the release vote if anyone
> identifies serious problems, but in most cases the ultimate decision, lies
> with the individual serving as release manager."
>
> This suggests whoever is serving as release manager can decide to cancel
> and re-spin a given release ( it also says "The specifics of the process
> may vary from project to project"... )
>
> > -Chris
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Tamás Cservenák <tamas@cservenak.net
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
> >> confusion.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> ~t~
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
> >>> And PASSED !!!
> >>>
> >>> IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
> >>>
> >>> 2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
> >>>> Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
> >>>>
> >>>> I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
> >>>> all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> ~t~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Olivier Lamy
> >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
> >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Stuart McCulloch <mc...@gmail.com>.
On 18 Sep 2012, at 00:42, Chris Graham wrote:
> If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
> that you could.
FWIW, from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:
"Generally the community will cancel the release vote if anyone identifies serious problems, but in most cases the ultimate decision, lies with the individual serving as release manager."
This suggests whoever is serving as release manager can decide to cancel and re-spin a given release ( it also says "The specifics of the process may vary from project to project"... )
> -Chris
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>wrote:
>
>> Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
>> confusion.
>>
>> Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~t~
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
>>> And PASSED !!!
>>>
>>> IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
>>>
>>> 2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
>>>> Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
>>>>
>>>> I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
>>>> all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> ~t~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Olivier Lamy
>>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
that you could.
-Chris
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>wrote:
> Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
> confusion.
>
> Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
> > And PASSED !!!
> >
> > IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
> >
> > 2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
> > > Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
> > >
> > > I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
> > > all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > ~t~
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Olivier Lamy
> > Talend: http://coders.talend.com
> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
confusion.
Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
Thanks,
~t~
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
> And PASSED !!!
>
> IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
>
> 2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
> > Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
> >
> > I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
> > all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ~t~
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
And PASSED !!!
IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>:
> Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
>
> I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
> all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
--
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
Thanks,
~t~
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Manfred Moser <ma...@mosabuam.com>.
On Thu, September 13, 2012 7:05 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Manfred Moser <ma...@mosabuam.com>
> wrote:
>> I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
>> until
>> it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
>> and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
>> browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
>> to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
>> invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart
>> and
>> then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>>
>>
> When a release has to move through 15 environments before it gets to prod
> (think large government project), and various change control boards etc,
> nothing is easy or cheap.
>
> And that is just for a release of code that we write. Updating the
> underlying technology stack is not a simple or cheap exercise.
>
> It's a matter of scale.
>
> Smaller, more self contained projects may indeed be able to take the
> faster
> route that you suggest.
>
> But it is always a matter of *business* risk, not *developer* led changes.
I understand all that but hear my out for a sec. Why do you think there
are 15 environments and change control board and all that overhead the
first place. Because in the past releases/changes were done every couple
of months or years .. therefore the risk to these changes was VERY high
and that needed to be controlled.
However imho (and many others) it would be less risky to constantly
introduce lots of small changes all the time and roll back these little
changes when necessary. But the software (and product delivered and
therefore the business value to the customer) has to constantly improve
and change and adapt to the needs.
This is only possible if you constantly maintain the software .. and part
of that maintenance is updating architectures, build systems and
everything else. Then each step is small and so is the risk involved.
Now I understand that this is a LARGE change to get there for most
organizations but imho this is where things are happening and how you
deliver the best business value for the LOWEST cost and with the smallest
risks. Just look at how any big place like Amazon or ebay or twitter or
Google or Facebook is doing there infrastructure. It is maintained and
updated and worked on all the time.
And the risk of these changes is smaller than falling behind and
accumulating debt and then having to sort it all out in one big change
that will be much more costly.
>> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real
>> technology
>> leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
>>
>
> I could not disagree with you more. And, in a strange way, you're made the
> very point that I'm trying to get across.
>
> What you've said there is a very developer centric view.
> Which is putting the technology ahead of the business.
> It is the business needs that should be dictating the technology; not the
> other way around.
Not at all. Just read above. I am just putting the long term perspective
of constantly innovating and improving before any short term savings from
a business perspective..
Just my 2c of course ;-)
manfred
> -Chris
>
>
>> pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
>> Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
>>
>> imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
>> downloads pages..
>>
>> just my 2c though ;-)
>>
>> manfred
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Manfred Moser <ma...@mosabuam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
> >> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
> >> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
> >>
> >
> > Simple.
> >
> > Two reasons actually.
> >
> > Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers and
> being
> > obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the world)...
> >
> > 1. Cost.
> >
> > 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned with
> > function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short, if it
> > works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
> >
> > Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one that is
> > *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due to the
> > support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
> > versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue paying
> > the huge support costs.
> >
> > But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is not a
> > cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
>
> I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting until
> it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
> and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
> browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
> to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
> invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart and
> then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>
>
When a release has to move through 15 environments before it gets to prod
(think large government project), and various change control boards etc,
nothing is easy or cheap.
And that is just for a release of code that we write. Updating the
underlying technology stack is not a simple or cheap exercise.
It's a matter of scale.
Smaller, more self contained projects may indeed be able to take the faster
route that you suggest.
But it is always a matter of *business* risk, not *developer* led changes.
> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real technology
> leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
>
I could not disagree with you more. And, in a strange way, you're made the
very point that I'm trying to get across.
What you've said there is a very developer centric view.
Which is putting the technology ahead of the business.
It is the business needs that should be dictating the technology; not the
other way around.
-Chris
> pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
> Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
>
> imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
> downloads pages..
>
> just my 2c though ;-)
>
> manfred
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Aleksandar Kurtakov <ak...@redhat.com>.
That's exactly what I think too!!
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Manfred Moser" <ma...@mosabuam.com>
> To: "Maven Developers List" <de...@maven.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 7:04:09 AM
> Subject: Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
>
> On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the
> >> Java
> >> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those
> >> on
> >> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide
> >> libraries
> >>
> >
> > Simple.
> >
> > Two reasons actually.
> >
> > Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers
> > and being
> > obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the
> > world)...
> >
> > 1. Cost.
> >
> > 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned
> > with
> > function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short,
> > if it
> > works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
> >
> > Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one
> > that is
> > *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due
> > to the
> > support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
> > versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue
> > paying
> > the huge support costs.
> >
> > But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is
> > not a
> > cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
>
> I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
> until
> it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and
> there
> and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime
> environments,
> browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be
> able
> to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to
> constantly
> invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart
> and
> then being forced to large costly upgrades.
>
> So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real
> technology
> leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing
> the
> pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with
> deprecating
> Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
>
> imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
> downloads pages..
>
> just my 2c though ;-)
>
> manfred
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Manfred Moser <ma...@mosabuam.com>.
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
>
>> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
>> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
>> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
>>
>
> Simple.
>
> Two reasons actually.
>
> Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers and being
> obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the world)...
>
> 1. Cost.
>
> 2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned with
> function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short, if it
> works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
>
> Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one that is
> *finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due to the
> support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
> versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue paying
> the huge support costs.
>
> But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is not a
> cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting until
it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
and stay up to date with your operating systems, runtime environments,
browsers and client site frameworks and so on you would actually be able
to save a LOT of money in the long run. But you would have to constantly
invest rather than waiting with no investment until things fall apart and
then being forced to large costly upgrades.
So it is mostly short sighted management and an absence of real technology
leadership in organizations causing this problem imho. And forcing the
pain to stay on old stuff higher (like Oracle is doing with deprecating
Java 6 earlier) is actually a good thing.
imho Maven 2 should have long been deprecated and removed from the
downloads pages..
just my 2c though ;-)
manfred
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Chris Graham <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
> I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
> community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
> older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
>
Simple.
Two reasons actually.
Without going off on an essay about the psychology of developers and being
obsessed with "shiny new things" (and a Dev centric view of the world)...
1. Cost.
2. Especially in the corporate world, they are far more concerned with
function rather than form (ie the underlying technology). In short, if it
works, leave it. Which also relates to #1.
Case in point: My current project is a multi million dollar one that is
*finally* moving from 5-7 YO tech to the newest stack. Partly due to the
support issues, but mostly due to the cost of support of the older
versions; it's finally become cheaper to upgrade than to continue paying
the huge support costs.
But my basic point is, that the act of upgrading large systems is not a
cheap one, so it is NOT done lightly.
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net>.
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
etc that are Java 1.4 compatible, there might not be enough reasons.
I'm sure there are lots of developers out there trying to explain to
their managers that they need to upgrade, and if they could say "we
need this to use the new cool and wicket-fast Maven Indexer release"
(maybe they need something else as well) that might be what makes the
upgrade happen.
But, we did touch on this topic before and the consensus was to leave
it on Java 5 level. I'm fine with that although it might not be along
my aggressive thinking.
/Anders
PS. Care to create a Java 7 fork of it? ;-)
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Actually, my hope was to have someone here say "c'mon, not bumping to
> Java6? Are you nuts?" and then continue with, "listen, you code _today_
> something that will be hopefully used 3-4 years from today. But, you are
> _prevented_ to leave something that is already dead _today_ for 3 years
> (will be 6-7 years during hopeful use of this release), you are prevented
> to bump the source to something that _will be dead_ in months from
> _today_... it does not make sense, especially as this is a major 5.x
> release....". Also, someone else could chime in with "those locked to java
> 5 and java 4 should seriously stop and think a bit". And another with "we
> [ASF] are an open, non-profit OSS forge, doing development for our own sake
> and love. so did the company [since it's not a natural person I hope]
> making you wont-fix this Java6 bump at least a golden sponsor of next
> upcoming ApacheCon?" and so on :D
>
> etc.
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
>
>> Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
>> could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
>> this relaese to think this has been introduced.
>>
>> /Anders
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Howdy,
>> >
>> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
>> >
>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>> >
>> >
>> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>> >
>> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > ~t~
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
Yup IMHO most of Maven indexer "users" are ide and/or repository
managers (most are probably already 1.6 required)
So perso I don't have any issues regarding moving to 1.6 required.
2012/9/12 Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com>:
> if it matters, netbeans (the user the library is on 1.6 for a while
> already), no problems whatsoever upgrading..
>
> Milos
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
>> Actually, my hope was to have someone here say "c'mon, not bumping to
>> Java6? Are you nuts?" and then continue with, "listen, you code _today_
>> something that will be hopefully used 3-4 years from today. But, you are
>> _prevented_ to leave something that is already dead _today_ for 3 years
>> (will be 6-7 years during hopeful use of this release), you are prevented
>> to bump the source to something that _will be dead_ in months from
>> _today_... it does not make sense, especially as this is a major 5.x
>> release....". Also, someone else could chime in with "those locked to java
>> 5 and java 4 should seriously stop and think a bit". And another with "we
>> [ASF] are an open, non-profit OSS forge, doing development for our own sake
>> and love. so did the company [since it's not a natural person I hope]
>> making you wont-fix this Java6 bump at least a golden sponsor of next
>> upcoming ApacheCon?" and so on :D
>>
>> etc.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~t~
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
>>> could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
>>> this relaese to think this has been introduced.
>>>
>>> /Anders
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Howdy,
>>> >
>>> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
>>> >
>>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>>> >
>>> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > ~t~
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Milos Kleint <mk...@gmail.com>.
if it matters, netbeans (the user the library is on 1.6 for a while
already), no problems whatsoever upgrading..
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Actually, my hope was to have someone here say "c'mon, not bumping to
> Java6? Are you nuts?" and then continue with, "listen, you code _today_
> something that will be hopefully used 3-4 years from today. But, you are
> _prevented_ to leave something that is already dead _today_ for 3 years
> (will be 6-7 years during hopeful use of this release), you are prevented
> to bump the source to something that _will be dead_ in months from
> _today_... it does not make sense, especially as this is a major 5.x
> release....". Also, someone else could chime in with "those locked to java
> 5 and java 4 should seriously stop and think a bit". And another with "we
> [ASF] are an open, non-profit OSS forge, doing development for our own sake
> and love. so did the company [since it's not a natural person I hope]
> making you wont-fix this Java6 bump at least a golden sponsor of next
> upcoming ApacheCon?" and so on :D
>
> etc.
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
>
>> Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
>> could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
>> this relaese to think this has been introduced.
>>
>> /Anders
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Howdy,
>> >
>> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
>> >
>> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>> >
>> >
>> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>> >
>> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > ~t~
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
Actually, my hope was to have someone here say "c'mon, not bumping to
Java6? Are you nuts?" and then continue with, "listen, you code _today_
something that will be hopefully used 3-4 years from today. But, you are
_prevented_ to leave something that is already dead _today_ for 3 years
(will be 6-7 years during hopeful use of this release), you are prevented
to bump the source to something that _will be dead_ in months from
_today_... it does not make sense, especially as this is a major 5.x
release....". Also, someone else could chime in with "those locked to java
5 and java 4 should seriously stop and think a bit". And another with "we
[ASF] are an open, non-profit OSS forge, doing development for our own sake
and love. so did the company [since it's not a natural person I hope]
making you wont-fix this Java6 bump at least a golden sponsor of next
upcoming ApacheCon?" and so on :D
etc.
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net> wrote:
> Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
> could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
> this relaese to think this has been introduced.
>
> /Anders
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>
> wrote:
> > Howdy,
> >
> > there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
> >
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
> >
> >
> > So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
> >
> > Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ~t~
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
Posted by Anders Hammar <an...@hammar.net>.
Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
this relaese to think this has been introduced.
/Anders
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
>
>
> So, I'd like to spin a release of it.
>
> Any objections to this? Any last minute wish?
>
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org