You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> on 2007/06/06 05:33:05 UTC
Re: artifact changes
On 06/06/2007, at 5:48 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> John has started an API cleanup for artifact resolution and one is
> slated for maven-project but the second we promote these we are
> really bound to support them and the one that are there now are
> unsupportable.
Is this different/related to the design paper you were working on?
As I've said before, I'm interested in collaborating on this, and
would like to see it posted somewhere.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Maven 2.1 Preparation Task List (was: artifact changes)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 7 Jun 07, at 4:28 PM 7 Jun 07, John Casey wrote:
> Sorry, I'm not really following.
>
> I understand that this is about integration-testing for Maven itself
That's all I was making clear.
> -john
>
> On Jun 7, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>>
>> On 7 Jun 07, at 3:00 PM 7 Jun 07, John Casey wrote:
>>
>>> I'll take the integration-testing tasks. Kenney and I have talked
>>> a bit about some of this stuff, so it'd be a natural extension to
>>> those discussions.
>>>
>>
>> These are specifically out integration tests for Maven itself, not
>> the plugin integration testing just so that's clear.
>>
>> I would like a hybrid of what we had where a good chunk of it was
>> declarative and I would also like to put the individual test with
>> the test. In order the match an archetype for an IT. We would have
>> to do a bit of work to make them all run together but that would
>> take 5 minutes to code up. I find the current structure a little
>> cumbersome.
>>
>>> -john
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 6, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok, I pushed all these into the MPA JIRA:
>>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?
>>>> reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/
>>>> field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=10332&fixfor=13535
>>>>
>>>> I've taken for myself:
>>>> - Come up with a minimal workflow for JIRA
>>>> - Clean up JIRA (not going to do it all, but propose the best
>>>> way to move forward)
>>>>
>>>> I assigned these to Jason since they are in progress already:
>>>> - Apply remaining patches in MNG JIRA
>>>> - release Maven 2.0.7
>>>> - Finalise and document taxonomy
>>>>
>>>> Any other volunteers?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Brett
>>>>
>>>> On 07/06/2007, at 1:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this
>>>>>> list to put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about
>>>>>> any implementation of anything being replace.
>>>>>
>>>>> In that case...
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>>>>>>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a
>>>>>>> point where we say "from this time on, only a certain level
>>>>>>> of quality is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes
>>>>>>> that don't come with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what
>>>>>>> you're doing, so I'll get stuck into that document again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> and ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to
>>>>>>> people?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Brett
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> ---
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> John Casey
>>> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
>>> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
>>> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
>> jason at sonatype dot com
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> ---
> John Casey
> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Maven 2.1 Preparation Task List (was: artifact changes)
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
Sorry, I'm not really following.
I understand that this is about integration-testing for Maven itself,
but IMO the best way to integration-test any Maven system - be it the
core or a plugin - is to create a series of builds that use the
feature under test. Therefore, core integration-tests should look a
lot like plugin integration-tests, and all of them should probably
use a common infrastructure (at least to a certain extent).
I'm not sure what you're saying about test locations or whether
they're declarative. Can you elaborate a little bit more? IMO, the
integration tests should be self-contained so they can be generated
using a simple archetype. Then, it would probably require a little
bit of extra code in the test harness to traverse all IT projects and
execute the test.
-john
On Jun 7, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 7 Jun 07, at 3:00 PM 7 Jun 07, John Casey wrote:
>
>> I'll take the integration-testing tasks. Kenney and I have talked
>> a bit about some of this stuff, so it'd be a natural extension to
>> those discussions.
>>
>
> These are specifically out integration tests for Maven itself, not
> the plugin integration testing just so that's clear.
>
> I would like a hybrid of what we had where a good chunk of it was
> declarative and I would also like to put the individual test with
> the test. In order the match an archetype for an IT. We would have
> to do a bit of work to make them all run together but that would
> take 5 minutes to code up. I find the current structure a little
> cumbersome.
>
>> -john
>>
>>
>> On Jun 6, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, I pushed all these into the MPA JIRA:
>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?
>>> reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/
>>> field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=10332&fixfor=13535
>>>
>>> I've taken for myself:
>>> - Come up with a minimal workflow for JIRA
>>> - Clean up JIRA (not going to do it all, but propose the best way
>>> to move forward)
>>>
>>> I assigned these to Jason since they are in progress already:
>>> - Apply remaining patches in MNG JIRA
>>> - release Maven 2.0.7
>>> - Finalise and document taxonomy
>>>
>>> Any other volunteers?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Brett
>>>
>>> On 07/06/2007, at 1:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this
>>>>> list to put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about
>>>>> any implementation of anything being replace.
>>>>
>>>> In that case...
>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>>>>>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a
>>>>>> point where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of
>>>>>> quality is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes
>>>>>> that don't come with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what
>>>>>> you're doing, so I'll get stuck into that document again.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to
>>>>>> people?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> - Brett
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> ---
>> John Casey
>> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
>> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
>> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
>>
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
Re: Maven 2.1 Preparation Task List (was: artifact changes)
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 7 Jun 07, at 3:00 PM 7 Jun 07, John Casey wrote:
> I'll take the integration-testing tasks. Kenney and I have talked a
> bit about some of this stuff, so it'd be a natural extension to
> those discussions.
>
These are specifically out integration tests for Maven itself, not
the plugin integration testing just so that's clear.
I would like a hybrid of what we had where a good chunk of it was
declarative and I would also like to put the individual test with the
test. In order the match an archetype for an IT. We would have to do
a bit of work to make them all run together but that would take 5
minutes to code up. I find the current structure a little cumbersome.
> -john
>
>
> On Jun 6, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> Ok, I pushed all these into the MPA JIRA:
>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?
>> reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/
>> field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=10332&fixfor=13535
>>
>> I've taken for myself:
>> - Come up with a minimal workflow for JIRA
>> - Clean up JIRA (not going to do it all, but propose the best way
>> to move forward)
>>
>> I assigned these to Jason since they are in progress already:
>> - Apply remaining patches in MNG JIRA
>> - release Maven 2.0.7
>> - Finalise and document taxonomy
>>
>> Any other volunteers?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>>
>> On 07/06/2007, at 1:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>
>>>> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this list
>>>> to put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about any
>>>> implementation of anything being replace.
>>>
>>> In that case...
>>>
>>>>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>>>>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a
>>>>> point where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of
>>>>> quality is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that
>>>>> don't come with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're
>>>>> doing, so I'll get stuck into that document again.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> and ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to
>>>>> people?
>>>>>
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> - Brett
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> 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
>>
>
> ---
> John Casey
> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Maven 2.1 Preparation Task List (was: artifact changes)
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
I'll take the integration-testing tasks. Kenney and I have talked a
bit about some of this stuff, so it'd be a natural extension to those
discussions.
-john
On Jun 6, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Ok, I pushed all these into the MPA JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?
> reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/
> field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=10332&fixfor=13535
>
> I've taken for myself:
> - Come up with a minimal workflow for JIRA
> - Clean up JIRA (not going to do it all, but propose the best way
> to move forward)
>
> I assigned these to Jason since they are in progress already:
> - Apply remaining patches in MNG JIRA
> - release Maven 2.0.7
> - Finalise and document taxonomy
>
> Any other volunteers?
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> On 07/06/2007, at 1:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>>
>> On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>>> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this list
>>> to put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about any
>>> implementation of anything being replace.
>>
>> In that case...
>>
>>>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>>>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a
>>>> point where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of
>>>> quality is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that
>>>> don't come with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're
>>>> doing, so I'll get stuck into that document again.
>>>>
>>
>> and ...
>>>>
>>>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to
>>>> people?
>>>>
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
Re: Maven 2.1 Preparation Task List (was: artifact changes)
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Ok, I pushed all these into the MPA JIRA:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?
reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/
field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=10332&fixfor=13535
I've taken for myself:
- Come up with a minimal workflow for JIRA
- Clean up JIRA (not going to do it all, but propose the best way to
move forward)
I assigned these to Jason since they are in progress already:
- Apply remaining patches in MNG JIRA
- release Maven 2.0.7
- Finalise and document taxonomy
Any other volunteers?
Cheers,
Brett
On 07/06/2007, at 1:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this list
>> to put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about any
>> implementation of anything being replace.
>
> In that case...
>
>>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a
>>> point where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of
>>> quality is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that
>>> don't come with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're
>>> doing, so I'll get stuck into that document again.
>>>
>
> and ...
>>>
>>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to people?
>>>
>
> WDYT?
>
> - Brett
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: artifact changes
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 07/06/2007, at 12:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this list to
> put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about any
> implementation of anything being replace.
In that case...
>> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
>> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a point
>> where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of quality
>> is acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that don't come
>> with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're doing, so I'll
>> get stuck into that document again.
>>
and ...
>>
>> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to people?
>>
WDYT?
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: artifact changes
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 6 Jun 07, at 12:55 AM 6 Jun 07, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> On 06/06/2007, at 2:06 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>>> Is this different/related to the design paper you were working on?
>>>
>>> As I've said before, I'm interested in collaborating on this, and
>>> would like to see it posted somewhere.
>>>
>>
>> No, he started on this prior to what I started. I have the
>> underlying logical mechanism. No final API.
>
> Maybe we're getting our wires crossed here, but I thought in both
> cases you were currently working on something.
There are no wires crossed, I did the implementation for a client so
I wouldn't consider it ready for inclusion into Maven with discussion
and documentation. We're not ready for discussion, which is why I've
push the list below to top priority for myself insofar as what I'm
going to do first.
> I can understand not getting heavy into implementation until we
> have our process nailed - but if there is anything in progress I'd
> like to see it.
>
I'm not switching gears until this list below is done because the
make heads or tails of what I've done will require some documentation
which I'm not finished with. Given that no one has done any
significant work on anything in the core I don't think there is any
particular rush. Nothing I have done has in any form been pushed into
SVN and I fully plan for the implementation to be presented with
documentation.
I stand by my case that all of us should be working on this list to
put us in a position to talk in a meaningful way about any
implementation of anything being replace.
>>
>> Before I'm willing to talk about anything related to 2.1 this is
>> my list:
>>
>> - Apply as many patches as possible (6 left to look at)
>> - Clean up JIRA
>> - Flush out the duplicates
>> - Close what issues have been dealt with
>> - Delete the issues with incomprehensible explanations
>> - I think if 10 of us when in there for a day we could reduce
>> what cruft there is and discuss how to manage the great
>> information that's in there which we generally don't look at
>> - Release 2.0.7
>> - Document making patches so nothing will be accepted without at
>> least working example project, with a preference for unit tests
>> and integration projects
>> - Make an archetype for test cases
>> - Make an archetype for ITs
>> - Document running the ITs
>> - Dealing with the IT issues I've listed previously
>> - Separate the design documents from the Taxonomy
>> - Taxonomy
>> - The start being the actual home page of the Maven space
>> - Align JIRA to Taxonomy
>> - Align Wiki to Taxonomy
>
> Yep, this is all goodness. I've always seen JIRA, testing
> requirements and the organisation of design documents as the
> important things before 'getting started' on 2.1 in earnest.
>
> I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development
> process we started some time back. I think we need to have a point
> where we say "from this time on, only a certain level of quality is
> acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that don't come
> with tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're doing, so I'll
> get stuck into that document again.
>
> The only caution I'd urge is that we don't over-reach in these
> things and have them fail. I'd rather draw a line, get started, and
> gradually improve (the taxonomy springs to mind here). I think
> we're on the right track at present.
>
>> Until these things are done we'll continue moving along slower
>> then we could be. I've managed to get releases out in a reasonable
>> time frame and it will only get better by finishing these items
>> first and I think we need to pull together and deal with these
>> first before any meaningful discussion can ensue.
>
> Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to people?
>
> - Brett
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: artifact changes
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 06/06/2007, at 2:06 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> Is this different/related to the design paper you were working on?
>>
>> As I've said before, I'm interested in collaborating on this, and
>> would like to see it posted somewhere.
>>
>
> No, he started on this prior to what I started. I have the
> underlying logical mechanism. No final API.
Maybe we're getting our wires crossed here, but I thought in both
cases you were currently working on something. I can understand not
getting heavy into implementation until we have our process nailed -
but if there is anything in progress I'd like to see it.
>
> Before I'm willing to talk about anything related to 2.1 this is my
> list:
>
> - Apply as many patches as possible (6 left to look at)
> - Clean up JIRA
> - Flush out the duplicates
> - Close what issues have been dealt with
> - Delete the issues with incomprehensible explanations
> - I think if 10 of us when in there for a day we could reduce
> what cruft there is and discuss how to manage the great information
> that's in there which we generally don't look at
> - Release 2.0.7
> - Document making patches so nothing will be accepted without at
> least working example project, with a preference for unit tests and
> integration projects
> - Make an archetype for test cases
> - Make an archetype for ITs
> - Document running the ITs
> - Dealing with the IT issues I've listed previously
> - Separate the design documents from the Taxonomy
> - Taxonomy
> - The start being the actual home page of the Maven space
> - Align JIRA to Taxonomy
> - Align Wiki to Taxonomy
Yep, this is all goodness. I've always seen JIRA, testing
requirements and the organisation of design documents as the
important things before 'getting started' on 2.1 in earnest.
I would like to champion the re-initiation of the development process
we started some time back. I think we need to have a point where we
say "from this time on, only a certain level of quality is
acceptable" - and be prepared to reject changes that don't come with
tests, etc. I think it ties in to what you're doing, so I'll get
stuck into that document again.
The only caution I'd urge is that we don't over-reach in these things
and have them fail. I'd rather draw a line, get started, and
gradually improve (the taxonomy springs to mind here). I think we're
on the right track at present.
> Until these things are done we'll continue moving along slower then
> we could be. I've managed to get releases out in a reasonable time
> frame and it will only get better by finishing these items first
> and I think we need to pull together and deal with these first
> before any meaningful discussion can ensue.
Should we have these listed as tasks that can be assigned to people?
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: artifact changes
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 5 Jun 07, at 11:33 PM 5 Jun 07, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> On 06/06/2007, at 5:48 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> John has started an API cleanup for artifact resolution and one is
>> slated for maven-project but the second we promote these we are
>> really bound to support them and the one that are there now are
>> unsupportable.
>
> Is this different/related to the design paper you were working on?
>
> As I've said before, I'm interested in collaborating on this, and
> would like to see it posted somewhere.
>
No, he started on this prior to what I started. I have the underlying
logical mechanism. No final API.
Before I'm willing to talk about anything related to 2.1 this is my
list:
- Apply as many patches as possible (6 left to look at)
- Clean up JIRA
- Flush out the duplicates
- Close what issues have been dealt with
- Delete the issues with incomprehensible explanations
- I think if 10 of us when in there for a day we could reduce what
cruft there is and discuss how to manage the great information that's
in there which we generally don't look at
- Release 2.0.7
- Document making patches so nothing will be accepted without at
least working example project, with a preference for unit tests and
integration projects
- Make an archetype for test cases
- Make an archetype for ITs
- Document running the ITs
- Dealing with the IT issues I've listed previously
- Separate the design documents from the Taxonomy
- Taxonomy
- The start being the actual home page of the Maven space
- Align JIRA to Taxonomy
- Align Wiki to Taxonomy
(I put the list here: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Home at
the top).
Until these things are done we'll continue moving along slower then
we could be. I've managed to get releases out in a reasonable time
frame and it will only get better by finishing these items first and
I think we need to pull together and deal with these first before any
meaningful discussion can ensue.
> - Brett
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org