You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> on 2014/01/04 22:42:00 UTC
Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring I'd like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some point soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330 so I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them in MavenSession.
If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated constructors and methods from MavenSession.
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
On Jan 5, 2014, at 6:27 AM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess my question is, why have we still not cut 3.2... If the answer is
> just nobody has bothered, then I'd be happy to give a spin through it...
Release it why? Simply because of 1.6? I don't think that's a particularly good reason. We can't just have one release that works with 1.6 forcing people to 1.7 if something happens to need fixing. I don't think there's much harm in using 1.6 for at least a few releases. I prefer 1.7 idioms as well but releasing simply for 1.6 while there is lots left to be done in the backlog doesn't make much sense.
> If
> the answer is bugs needing a fixing then let's get those out of the way and
> spin that release already... Then we can have a clear run at 4.0 with
> deprection a go-go
I have moved all 3.1.x issues into 3.2 for the time being. Anyone who wants to do anything for 3.2 then assign them to yourself and we can work through them. Maybe we shoot for completion of whatever can be done in the next two weeks? Anything that's not assigned early next week, I'll move into the 3.x/Backlog.
Sound reasonable?
>
> On Sunday, 5 January 2014, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
>> My PoV is that once Java 8 is released we drop support for running on Java
>> 6 (keep support for compiling with a Java 6 JDK via toolchains)
>>
>> We should be one and one back with regards to the runtime JVM maven
>> requires.
>>
>> But to get there I'd like to see a JDK 6 min release first, gauge how the
>> community responds to that.
>>
>> Also there is the redhat OpenJDK 6 commitment, and IBM are not near EOL on
>> their JDK 6... So that is less clear-cut
>>
>> On Sunday, 5 January 2014, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
>>
>>> As i mentioned in referenced thread, i would really like to see maven at
>>> java7.
>>>
>>> We talk about release to happen in near future, that would be used in a
>>> bit
>>> further future by users, but even _today_ there is no other java than 7
>>> that is not eol-d. For those locked in, there are still 3.0, 3.1 releases
>>> (and 3.2?)
>>>
>>> I know others have other "wishes" for 4.0 but in this case i really see no
>>> rationale to not make this step.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> ~t~ (mobile)
>>> On Jan 5, 2014 10:43 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <
>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
>>>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be
>>> pushing
>>>> a
>>>>>> 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for
>>> trying to
>>>>> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
>>>>> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
>>>> right
>>>>> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and
>>> look
>>>>> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
>>>> runtime
>>>>> level to 1.6.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
>>>>
>>>> I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
>>>>
>>>> For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
>>>>
>>>> Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
>>>> aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
>>>> confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some
>>> refactoring
>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>>>>>>> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
>>>>> point
>>>>>>> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
>>>> JSR330
>>>>> so
>>>>>>> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of
>>> them
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> MavenSession.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>>>>>>> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>>>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sent from my phone
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jason
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from my phone
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my phone
>>
>
>
> --
> Sent from my phone
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
I guess my question is, why have we still not cut 3.2... If the answer is
just nobody has bothered, then I'd be happy to give a spin through it... If
the answer is bugs needing a fixing then let's get those out of the way and
spin that release already... Then we can have a clear run at 4.0 with
deprection a go-go
On Sunday, 5 January 2014, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> My PoV is that once Java 8 is released we drop support for running on Java
> 6 (keep support for compiling with a Java 6 JDK via toolchains)
>
> We should be one and one back with regards to the runtime JVM maven
> requires.
>
> But to get there I'd like to see a JDK 6 min release first, gauge how the
> community responds to that.
>
> Also there is the redhat OpenJDK 6 commitment, and IBM are not near EOL on
> their JDK 6... So that is less clear-cut
>
> On Sunday, 5 January 2014, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
>
>> As i mentioned in referenced thread, i would really like to see maven at
>> java7.
>>
>> We talk about release to happen in near future, that would be used in a
>> bit
>> further future by users, but even _today_ there is no other java than 7
>> that is not eol-d. For those locked in, there are still 3.0, 3.1 releases
>> (and 3.2?)
>>
>> I know others have other "wishes" for 4.0 but in this case i really see no
>> rationale to not make this step.
>>
>> thanks,
>> ~t~ (mobile)
>> On Jan 5, 2014 10:43 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <
>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
>> > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>> > > >
>> > > > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be
>> pushing
>> > a
>> > > > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for
>> trying to
>> > > keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
>> > > because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
>> > right
>> > > then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>> > >
>> > > If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and
>> look
>> > > for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
>> > runtime
>> > > level to 1.6.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
>> >
>> > I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
>> >
>> > For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
>> >
>> > Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
>> > aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
>> > confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
>> >
>> > >
>> > > > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some
>> refactoring
>> > > I'd
>> > > >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>> > > >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
>> > > point
>> > > >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
>> > JSR330
>> > > so
>> > > >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of
>> them
>> > > in
>> > > >> MavenSession.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>> > > >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Jason
>> > > >>
>> > > >> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> Jason van Zyl
>> > > >> Founder, Apache Maven
>> > > >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Sent from my phone
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Jason
>> > >
>> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
>> > > Jason van Zyl
>> > > Founder, Apache Maven
>> > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sent from my phone
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Sent from my phone
>
--
Sent from my phone
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
My PoV is that once Java 8 is released we drop support for running on Java
6 (keep support for compiling with a Java 6 JDK via toolchains)
We should be one and one back with regards to the runtime JVM maven
requires.
But to get there I'd like to see a JDK 6 min release first, gauge how the
community responds to that.
Also there is the redhat OpenJDK 6 commitment, and IBM are not near EOL on
their JDK 6... So that is less clear-cut
On Sunday, 5 January 2014, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> As i mentioned in referenced thread, i would really like to see maven at
> java7.
>
> We talk about release to happen in near future, that would be used in a bit
> further future by users, but even _today_ there is no other java than 7
> that is not eol-d. For those locked in, there are still 3.0, 3.1 releases
> (and 3.2?)
>
> I know others have other "wishes" for 4.0 but in this case i really see no
> rationale to not make this step.
>
> thanks,
> ~t~ (mobile)
> On Jan 5, 2014 10:43 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> > > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
> > > >
> > > > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be
> pushing
> > a
> > > > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
> > > >
> > >
> > > 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying
> to
> > > keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
> > > because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
> > right
> > > then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
> > >
> > > If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and
> look
> > > for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
> > runtime
> > > level to 1.6.
> > >
> > >
> > I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
> >
> > I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
> >
> > For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
> >
> > Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
> > aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
> > confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
> >
> > >
> > > > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some
> refactoring
> > > I'd
> > > >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> > > >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
> > > point
> > > >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
> > JSR330
> > > so
> > > >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of
> them
> > > in
> > > >> MavenSession.
> > > >>
> > > >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> > > >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> Jason
> > > >>
> > > >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> Jason van Zyl
> > > >> Founder, Apache Maven
> > > >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sent from my phone
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > Jason van Zyl
> > > Founder, Apache Maven
> > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my phone
> >
>
--
Sent from my phone
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
I missed jvz's question: yes for removal of deprecations eagerly. If
anything, we should start doing that eagerly (4 years?), and declare this
step as transitioning one toward 4.0?
thanks,
~t~ (mobile)
On Jan 5, 2014 11:29 AM, "Tamás Cservenák" <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> As i mentioned in referenced thread, i would really like to see maven at
> java7.
>
> We talk about release to happen in near future, that would be used in a
> bit further future by users, but even _today_ there is no other java than 7
> that is not eol-d. For those locked in, there are still 3.0, 3.1 releases
> (and 3.2?)
>
> I know others have other "wishes" for 4.0 but in this case i really see no
> rationale to not make this step.
>
> thanks,
> ~t~ (mobile)
> On Jan 5, 2014 10:43 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
>> > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>> > >
>> > > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be
>> pushing a
>> > > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>> > >
>> >
>> > 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying
>> to
>> > keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
>> > because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
>> right
>> > then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>> >
>> > If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
>> > for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
>> runtime
>> > level to 1.6.
>> >
>> >
>> I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
>>
>> I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
>>
>> For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
>>
>> Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
>> aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
>> confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
>>
>> >
>> > > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some
>> refactoring
>> > I'd
>> > >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>> > >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
>> > point
>> > >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
>> JSR330
>> > so
>> > >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of
>> them
>> > in
>> > >> MavenSession.
>> > >>
>> > >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>> > >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >>
>> > >> Jason
>> > >>
>> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> Jason van Zyl
>> > >> Founder, Apache Maven
>> > >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Sent from my phone
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Jason
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------
>> > Jason van Zyl
>> > Founder, Apache Maven
>> > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my phone
>>
>
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net>.
As i mentioned in referenced thread, i would really like to see maven at
java7.
We talk about release to happen in near future, that would be used in a bit
further future by users, but even _today_ there is no other java than 7
that is not eol-d. For those locked in, there are still 3.0, 3.1 releases
(and 3.2?)
I know others have other "wishes" for 4.0 but in this case i really see no
rationale to not make this step.
thanks,
~t~ (mobile)
On Jan 5, 2014 10:43 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <st...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> > stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
> > >
> > > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing
> a
> > > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
> > >
> >
> > 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying to
> > keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
> > because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
> right
> > then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
> >
> > If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
> > for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
> runtime
> > level to 1.6.
> >
> >
> I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
>
> I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
>
> For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
>
> Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
> aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
> confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
>
> >
> > > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
> > I'd
> > >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> > >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
> > point
> > >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
> JSR330
> > so
> > >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
> > in
> > >> MavenSession.
> > >>
> > >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> > >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Jason
> > >>
> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> > >> Jason van Zyl
> > >> Founder, Apache Maven
> > >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from my phone
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Jason van Zyl
> > Founder, Apache Maven
> > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my phone
>
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
> >
> > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing a
> > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
> >
>
> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying to
> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release right
> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>
> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the runtime
> level to 1.6.
>
>
I guess my PoV is what new features are we adding that make it a 4.0?
I personally think we should cut 3.2 with the 1.6 bump and get that out
For The 4.0 version number I would like to see some new features...
Otoh we could hold off new features for 5.0 with the excuse that we were
aligning maven's version number with the modelVersion to remove
confusion.., but that is a card we can only play once
>
> > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
> I'd
> >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
> point
> >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330
> so
> >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
> in
> >> MavenSession.
> >>
> >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Jason van Zyl
> >> Founder, Apache Maven
> >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my phone
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sent from my phone
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
On Jan 5, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just see little point in pissing off users with extensive breakage if we
> have simple means of assessing the consequences before we do it.
I'm not disagreeing with you about running what we have and knowing what breaks. It's easy enough to make a branch and run the builds to let people know.
> Deprecations come in all sorts, some turn out to be like the "new" style
> configuration for the site plugin; where exposure to the wild revealed that
> the old solution had important capabilities the new solution was lacking.
>
> It's really just a matter of having some idea of how much stuff breaks. Of
> course the code should be rewritten. Without any real knowledge of the
> impact of removing the methods, we're really only guessing.
>
> Kristian
>
>
>
>
>
> 2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
>
>> In general for deprecated code that's in the year or so old range I think
>> that strategy is fine. We just haven't been very good removing stuff.
>>
>> In the case of this code it's had the deprecated warning for a long time
>> and if it's removed and it breaks code then that code needs to change IMO.
>> If they are plugins those plugins can update their code along with prereq.
>> The authors can push out a final version for the 3.x line and then move
>> forward with working with 4.0.
>>
>> On Jan 5, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Kristian Rosenvold <
>> kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should remove any deprecations that do not break trunk of
>>> maven-plugins and mojo-trunk, and call it 3.2; at least do this as an
>>> initial move. Then we can determine the scope of /use/ of deprecations.
>>>
>>> I am very skeptical to removing stuff wholesale "just because" we
>>> deprecated it 4 years ago, I think a slightly more careful approach is
>>> better.
>>>
>>> Kristian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
>>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing
>> a
>>>>> 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying
>> to
>>>> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
>>>> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
>> right
>>>> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>>>>
>>>> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
>>>> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
>> runtime
>>>> level to 1.6.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
>>>> I'd
>>>>>> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>>>>>> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
>>>> point
>>>>>> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
>> JSR330
>>>> so
>>>>>> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
>>>> in
>>>>>> MavenSession.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>>>>>> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sent from my phone
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder, Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>.
I just see little point in pissing off users with extensive breakage if we
have simple means of assessing the consequences before we do it.
Deprecations come in all sorts, some turn out to be like the "new" style
configuration for the site plugin; where exposure to the wild revealed that
the old solution had important capabilities the new solution was lacking.
It's really just a matter of having some idea of how much stuff breaks. Of
course the code should be rewritten. Without any real knowledge of the
impact of removing the methods, we're really only guessing.
Kristian
2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
> In general for deprecated code that's in the year or so old range I think
> that strategy is fine. We just haven't been very good removing stuff.
>
> In the case of this code it's had the deprecated warning for a long time
> and if it's removed and it breaks code then that code needs to change IMO.
> If they are plugins those plugins can update their code along with prereq.
> The authors can push out a final version for the 3.x line and then move
> forward with working with 4.0.
>
> On Jan 5, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Kristian Rosenvold <
> kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think we should remove any deprecations that do not break trunk of
> > maven-plugins and mojo-trunk, and call it 3.2; at least do this as an
> > initial move. Then we can determine the scope of /use/ of deprecations.
> >
> > I am very skeptical to removing stuff wholesale "just because" we
> > deprecated it 4 years ago, I think a slightly more careful approach is
> > better.
> >
> > Kristian
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
> >
> >>
> >> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> >> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
> >>>
> >>> I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing
> a
> >>> 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
> >>>
> >>
> >> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying
> to
> >> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
> >> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release
> right
> >> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
> >>
> >> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
> >> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the
> runtime
> >> level to 1.6.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
> >> I'd
> >>>> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> >>>> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
> >> point
> >>>> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully
> JSR330
> >> so
> >>>> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
> >> in
> >>>> MavenSession.
> >>>>
> >>>> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> >>>> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Jason
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Jason van Zyl
> >>>> Founder, Apache Maven
> >>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from my phone
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Jason van Zyl
> >> Founder, Apache Maven
> >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
In general for deprecated code that's in the year or so old range I think that strategy is fine. We just haven't been very good removing stuff.
In the case of this code it's had the deprecated warning for a long time and if it's removed and it breaks code then that code needs to change IMO. If they are plugins those plugins can update their code along with prereq. The authors can push out a final version for the 3.x line and then move forward with working with 4.0.
On Jan 5, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we should remove any deprecations that do not break trunk of
> maven-plugins and mojo-trunk, and call it 3.2; at least do this as an
> initial move. Then we can determine the scope of /use/ of deprecations.
>
> I am very skeptical to removing stuff wholesale "just because" we
> deprecated it 4 years ago, I think a slightly more careful approach is
> better.
>
> Kristian
>
>
>
> 2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
>
>>
>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>>>
>>> I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing a
>>> 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>>>
>>
>> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying to
>> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
>> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release right
>> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>>
>> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
>> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the runtime
>> level to 1.6.
>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
>> I'd
>>>> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>>>> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
>> point
>>>> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330
>> so
>>>> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
>> in
>>>> MavenSession.
>>>>
>>>> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>>>> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from my phone
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder, Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>.
I think we should remove any deprecations that do not break trunk of
maven-plugins and mojo-trunk, and call it 3.2; at least do this as an
initial move. Then we can determine the scope of /use/ of deprecations.
I am very skeptical to removing stuff wholesale "just because" we
deprecated it 4 years ago, I think a slightly more careful approach is
better.
Kristian
2014/1/5 Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>
>
> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
> >
> > I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing a
> > 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
> >
>
> 3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying to
> keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels
> because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release right
> then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
>
> If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look
> for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the runtime
> level to 1.6.
>
> >
> > On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> >> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring
> I'd
> >> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> >> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some
> point
> >> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330
> so
> >> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them
> in
> >> MavenSession.
> >>
> >> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> >> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Jason van Zyl
> >> Founder, Apache Maven
> >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my phone
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
>
> I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing a
> 3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
>
3.1.1 was released on September 17th so we're a bit overdue for trying to keep the quarterly schedule, but I asked to update the source levels because it was after September. I didn't know that implied a release right then. But then an email discussion chain ensued and I lost track.
If we're going to bump to 4.0 then I will sift through the core and look for more deprecated code. Might as well do a removal, and bump the runtime level to 1.6.
>
> On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring I'd
>> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
>> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some point
>> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330 so
>> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them in
>> MavenSession.
>>
>> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
>> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder, Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my phone
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Cleaning out @deprecated methods in MavenSession
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
Doing so would make the next version 4.0 and not 3.2
I don't mind if we want to do that, but we were supposed to be pushing a
3.2 out at the start of Oct and I do wonder what the status is there
On Saturday, 4 January 2014, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I'm doing some cleanup in the core in preparation for some refactoring I'd
> like to propose in the coming months and the deprecated methods in
> MavenSession have been there for over 4 years. I'd like to, at some point
> soon, be able to move the core and plugins to toward being fully JSR330 so
> I'd like to start purging references to Plexus. There are lots of them in
> MavenSession.
>
> If no one has any objections I'd like to remove the deprecated
> constructors and methods from MavenSession.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sent from my phone