You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Manfred Geiler <ma...@apache.org> on 2007/11/05 12:31:37 UTC
[vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Ok, the vote for master pom version 1 was no success story - thanks for
totally ignoring me... ;-)
Second try:
Some additional info to motivate you to vote this time: I'm am currently
planning the overdue new releases of MyFaces Core (1.1.6 and 1.2.1) and
Tomahawk (1.1.7). Well, before that I want to clean up our pigsty. Having a
clear and simple master pom for all MyFaces projects is one task.
I have added the new markmail.org mailing lists to the master pom. Please
Note: We are now at version 2 cause it was easier for me to do the maven
releasing once more from the start.
You can find the (new) signed release candidate at [3].
Please vote
+1 if you reviewed the new master pom version 2 and think we can use it as
the new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
-1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
Thanks,
--Manfred
[3]
http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/2/
On 10/31/07, Manfred Geiler <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> This is the official vote for the release of our new MyFaces Master-POM.
>
> The current myfaces-master POM has some flaws as was discussed in [1].
>
> I already have tested a complete build of core and tomahawk with the new
> master.
> I have NOT tested Trinidad and Tobago yet (both currently do not
> depend on the old myfaces master pom) and would kindly ask some other
> guys to check that.
>
> You can find the signed release candidate at [2].
>
> Please vote
> +1 if you reviewed the new master pom and think we can use it as the
> new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
> -1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
>
> Thanks,
> --Manfred
>
>
> [1] http://www.nabble.com/-proposal--New-MyFaces-Master-POM-t4703523.html
> [2]
> http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/1/
>
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>.
forgot my own vote
+1 of course ;-)
I close the vote with the following results:
+1 votes: 4
-1 votes: 0
I will copy the artifact to the maven rsync dir later today.
--Manfred
On 11/5/07, Ron Smits <ro...@ronsmits.org> wrote:
>
> +1 and use the opt out.
>
> Ron
>
> On 11/5/07, Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +0
> >
> > Sorry I'm completely swamped this week, but I don't want you to feel
> > totally ignore again!
> >
> > On Nov 5, 2007 6:37 AM, Bernd Bohmann <bernd.bohmann@atanion.com >
> > wrote:
> > > Ok
> > >
> > > Manfred Geiler schrieb:
> > >
> > > > On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> > > >> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
> > > >>
> > > >> remove
> > > >>
> > > >> maven-compiler-plugin
> > > >> maven-checkstyle-plugin
> > > >> maven-pmd-plugin
> > > >>
> > > >> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > Hmm, generally we have two options regarding plugin configurations:
> > > > - "opt-out": Define a default in the master pom. Subprojects may
> > override
> > > > those settings if required.
> > > > - "opt-in": Subprojects must take responsibility to provide those
> > > > configurations.
> > > >
> > > > My feeling is, we should define all the settings in the master pom
> > that
> > > > apply to *most* of our subprojects because:
> > > > - integrity: subproject developers might not be aware of a certain
> > plugin
> > > > and tend to "forget" the settings
> > > > - convenience and redundancy avoiding: the smaller each of the
> > subproject
> > > > poms the better
> > > > - safety: forgetting to define a plugin might lead to unwanted
> > effects
> > > >
> > > > For the plugins Bernd mentioned:
> > > > - maven-compiler-plugin: The requirement for JSF 1.0 and 1.1 is jdk
> > 1.3 and
> > > > therefore all subprojects should be compilable with 1.3 UNLESS they
> > are
> > > > explicitly meant for JSF 1.2 or JDK 1.5. Therefore I would prefer
> > "opt-out"
> > > > here.
> > > > - maven-checkstyle-plugin: The header check is important to avoid
> > missing
> > > > or bad ASF license headers. So, for saftey reasons I would prefer
> > "opt-out"
> > > > here as well.
> > > > - maven-pmd-plugin: Is there a good reason why we could/should not
> > have one
> > > > global PMD config? Why does Tobago have different settings at the
> > moment? I
> > > > guess, it's for historical reasons. So, I would prefer to do a
> > "merge" if
> > > > possible.
> > > >
> > > > --Manfred
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Grant Smith
> >
>
>
>
> --
> I reject your reality and substitute my own
> --- Adam Savage, the mythbusters
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting,
Development and Courses in English and
German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Ron Smits <ro...@ronsmits.org>.
+1 and use the opt out.
Ron
On 11/5/07, Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +0
>
> Sorry I'm completely swamped this week, but I don't want you to feel
> totally ignore again!
>
> On Nov 5, 2007 6:37 AM, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> > Ok
> >
> > Manfred Geiler schrieb:
> >
> > > On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> > >> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
> > >>
> > >> remove
> > >>
> > >> maven-compiler-plugin
> > >> maven-checkstyle-plugin
> > >> maven-pmd-plugin
> > >>
> > >> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Hmm, generally we have two options regarding plugin configurations:
> > > - "opt-out": Define a default in the master pom. Subprojects may
> override
> > > those settings if required.
> > > - "opt-in": Subprojects must take responsibility to provide those
> > > configurations.
> > >
> > > My feeling is, we should define all the settings in the master pom
> that
> > > apply to *most* of our subprojects because:
> > > - integrity: subproject developers might not be aware of a certain
> plugin
> > > and tend to "forget" the settings
> > > - convenience and redundancy avoiding: the smaller each of the
> subproject
> > > poms the better
> > > - safety: forgetting to define a plugin might lead to unwanted
> effects
> > >
> > > For the plugins Bernd mentioned:
> > > - maven-compiler-plugin: The requirement for JSF 1.0 and 1.1 is jdk
> 1.3 and
> > > therefore all subprojects should be compilable with 1.3 UNLESS they
> are
> > > explicitly meant for JSF 1.2 or JDK 1.5. Therefore I would prefer
> "opt-out"
> > > here.
> > > - maven-checkstyle-plugin: The header check is important to avoid
> missing
> > > or bad ASF license headers. So, for saftey reasons I would prefer
> "opt-out"
> > > here as well.
> > > - maven-pmd-plugin: Is there a good reason why we could/should not
> have one
> > > global PMD config? Why does Tobago have different settings at the
> moment? I
> > > guess, it's for historical reasons. So, I would prefer to do a "merge"
> if
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > --Manfred
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Grant Smith
>
--
I reject your reality and substitute my own
--- Adam Savage, the mythbusters
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Grant Smith <wo...@gmail.com>.
+0
Sorry I'm completely swamped this week, but I don't want you to feel
totally ignore again!
On Nov 5, 2007 6:37 AM, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> Ok
>
> Manfred Geiler schrieb:
>
> > On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> >> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
> >>
> >> remove
> >>
> >> maven-compiler-plugin
> >> maven-checkstyle-plugin
> >> maven-pmd-plugin
> >>
> >> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
> >>
> >>
> > Hmm, generally we have two options regarding plugin configurations:
> > - "opt-out": Define a default in the master pom. Subprojects may override
> > those settings if required.
> > - "opt-in": Subprojects must take responsibility to provide those
> > configurations.
> >
> > My feeling is, we should define all the settings in the master pom that
> > apply to *most* of our subprojects because:
> > - integrity: subproject developers might not be aware of a certain plugin
> > and tend to "forget" the settings
> > - convenience and redundancy avoiding: the smaller each of the subproject
> > poms the better
> > - safety: forgetting to define a plugin might lead to unwanted effects
> >
> > For the plugins Bernd mentioned:
> > - maven-compiler-plugin: The requirement for JSF 1.0 and 1.1 is jdk 1.3 and
> > therefore all subprojects should be compilable with 1.3 UNLESS they are
> > explicitly meant for JSF 1.2 or JDK 1.5. Therefore I would prefer "opt-out"
> > here.
> > - maven-checkstyle-plugin: The header check is important to avoid missing
> > or bad ASF license headers. So, for saftey reasons I would prefer "opt-out"
> > here as well.
> > - maven-pmd-plugin: Is there a good reason why we could/should not have one
> > global PMD config? Why does Tobago have different settings at the moment? I
> > guess, it's for historical reasons. So, I would prefer to do a "merge" if
> > possible.
> >
> > --Manfred
> >
>
--
Grant Smith
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com>.
Ok
Manfred Geiler schrieb:
> On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
>>
>> remove
>>
>> maven-compiler-plugin
>> maven-checkstyle-plugin
>> maven-pmd-plugin
>>
>> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
>>
>>
> Hmm, generally we have two options regarding plugin configurations:
> - "opt-out": Define a default in the master pom. Subprojects may override
> those settings if required.
> - "opt-in": Subprojects must take responsibility to provide those
> configurations.
>
> My feeling is, we should define all the settings in the master pom that
> apply to *most* of our subprojects because:
> - integrity: subproject developers might not be aware of a certain plugin
> and tend to "forget" the settings
> - convenience and redundancy avoiding: the smaller each of the subproject
> poms the better
> - safety: forgetting to define a plugin might lead to unwanted effects
>
> For the plugins Bernd mentioned:
> - maven-compiler-plugin: The requirement for JSF 1.0 and 1.1 is jdk 1.3 and
> therefore all subprojects should be compilable with 1.3 UNLESS they are
> explicitly meant for JSF 1.2 or JDK 1.5. Therefore I would prefer "opt-out"
> here.
> - maven-checkstyle-plugin: The header check is important to avoid missing
> or bad ASF license headers. So, for saftey reasons I would prefer "opt-out"
> here as well.
> - maven-pmd-plugin: Is there a good reason why we could/should not have one
> global PMD config? Why does Tobago have different settings at the moment? I
> guess, it's for historical reasons. So, I would prefer to do a "merge" if
> possible.
>
> --Manfred
>
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
>
> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
>
> remove
>
> maven-compiler-plugin
> maven-checkstyle-plugin
> maven-pmd-plugin
>
> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
>
>
Hmm, generally we have two options regarding plugin configurations:
- "opt-out": Define a default in the master pom. Subprojects may override
those settings if required.
- "opt-in": Subprojects must take responsibility to provide those
configurations.
My feeling is, we should define all the settings in the master pom that
apply to *most* of our subprojects because:
- integrity: subproject developers might not be aware of a certain plugin
and tend to "forget" the settings
- convenience and redundancy avoiding: the smaller each of the subproject
poms the better
- safety: forgetting to define a plugin might lead to unwanted effects
For the plugins Bernd mentioned:
- maven-compiler-plugin: The requirement for JSF 1.0 and 1.1 is jdk 1.3 and
therefore all subprojects should be compilable with 1.3 UNLESS they are
explicitly meant for JSF 1.2 or JDK 1.5. Therefore I would prefer "opt-out"
here.
- maven-checkstyle-plugin: The header check is important to avoid missing
or bad ASF license headers. So, for saftey reasons I would prefer "opt-out"
here as well.
- maven-pmd-plugin: Is there a good reason why we could/should not have one
global PMD config? Why does Tobago have different settings at the moment? I
guess, it's for historical reasons. So, I would prefer to do a "merge" if
possible.
--Manfred
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
+1 and have all committers add them selfs :-)
On 11/5/07, Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> I would suggest following changes for the next version:
>
> remove
>
> maven-compiler-plugin
> maven-checkstyle-plugin
> maven-pmd-plugin
>
> I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
> Manfred Geiler schrieb:
> > Ok, the vote for master pom version 1 was no success story - thanks for
> > totally ignoring me... ;-)
> >
> > Second try:
> >
> > Some additional info to motivate you to vote this time: I'm am currently
> > planning the overdue new releases of MyFaces Core (1.1.6 and 1.2.1) and
> > Tomahawk (1.1.7). Well, before that I want to clean up our pigsty. Having a
> > clear and simple master pom for all MyFaces projects is one task.
> >
> > I have added the new markmail.org mailing lists to the master pom. Please
> > Note: We are now at version 2 cause it was easier for me to do the maven
> > releasing once more from the start.
> > You can find the (new) signed release candidate at [3].
> >
> > Please vote
> > +1 if you reviewed the new master pom version 2 and think we can use it as
> > the new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
> > -1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Manfred
> >
> > [3]
> > http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/2/
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/31/07, Manfred Geiler <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> This is the official vote for the release of our new MyFaces Master-POM.
> >>
> >> The current myfaces-master POM has some flaws as was discussed in [1].
> >>
> >> I already have tested a complete build of core and tomahawk with the new
> >> master.
> >> I have NOT tested Trinidad and Tobago yet (both currently do not
> >> depend on the old myfaces master pom) and would kindly ask some other
> >> guys to check that.
> >>
> >> You can find the signed release candidate at [2].
> >>
> >> Please vote
> >> +1 if you reviewed the new master pom and think we can use it as the
> >> new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
> >> -1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> --Manfred
> >>
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.nabble.com/-proposal--New-MyFaces-Master-POM-t4703523.html
> >> [2]
> >> http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/1/
> >>
> >
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [vote] myfaces-master-pom version 2
Posted by Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com>.
+1
I would suggest following changes for the next version:
remove
maven-compiler-plugin
maven-checkstyle-plugin
maven-pmd-plugin
I think these plugins should be configured by the subprojects.
Regards
Bernd
Manfred Geiler schrieb:
> Ok, the vote for master pom version 1 was no success story - thanks for
> totally ignoring me... ;-)
>
> Second try:
>
> Some additional info to motivate you to vote this time: I'm am currently
> planning the overdue new releases of MyFaces Core (1.1.6 and 1.2.1) and
> Tomahawk (1.1.7). Well, before that I want to clean up our pigsty. Having a
> clear and simple master pom for all MyFaces projects is one task.
>
> I have added the new markmail.org mailing lists to the master pom. Please
> Note: We are now at version 2 cause it was easier for me to do the maven
> releasing once more from the start.
> You can find the (new) signed release candidate at [3].
>
> Please vote
> +1 if you reviewed the new master pom version 2 and think we can use it as
> the new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
> -1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
>
> Thanks,
> --Manfred
>
> [3]
> http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/2/
>
>
>
> On 10/31/07, Manfred Geiler <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> This is the official vote for the release of our new MyFaces Master-POM.
>>
>> The current myfaces-master POM has some flaws as was discussed in [1].
>>
>> I already have tested a complete build of core and tomahawk with the new
>> master.
>> I have NOT tested Trinidad and Tobago yet (both currently do not
>> depend on the old myfaces master pom) and would kindly ask some other
>> guys to check that.
>>
>> You can find the signed release candidate at [2].
>>
>> Please vote
>> +1 if you reviewed the new master pom and think we can use it as the
>> new master for ALL projects under the MyFaces umbrella
>> -1 if you found a flaw or potential problem with the new master
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Manfred
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.nabble.com/-proposal--New-MyFaces-Master-POM-t4703523.html
>> [2]
>> http://people.apache.org/builds/myfaces/m2-staging-repository/org/apache/myfaces/myfaces/1/
>>
>