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...@maven.org> on 2007/08/21 17:10:57 UTC
maven-artifact patches
Mark,
If you are going to be around today I was going to apply some patches
and do some fixes but I wanted to get some feedback about attempting
to use the same separate code now in maven-artifact. It would be far
better to use the same code for both 2.0.x and 2.1.x and I don't
believe they are wildly divergent at this point. We just need to make
sure that anything using the resolver directly or the repository
metadata still gets everything it needs from the unified maven-artifact.
We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much easier.
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-artifact patches
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 29 Aug 07, at 8:41 AM 29 Aug 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
> On 29/08/2007, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>> I would very much like to try and get both versions of Maven to use
>> it. If at all possibly we should try this and between you, myself,
>> Patrick and Ralph we can probably determine if this is possible. If
>> we decide we have to mimic bugs then it might not be worth it. But I
>> would definitely consolidate your work in the separated maven-
>> artifact as that's what 2.1 is using now.
>
> Cool, that sounds good. I haven't checked the differences between
> maven-artifact in 2.0.x and 2.1.x, but I assume the remaining work is
> to integrate it into 2.0.x? I'd be happy to help if I can find some
> free time. Let me know the plans.
>
There should not be very many differences. I think it amounts to a
few fixes and the work you've done. The changes you've made should be
integrated into maven-artifact 3.0-S. I think we all agree on this.
At that point all the code should be in one place.
When it is we can determine if we can feasibly use the same code base
in 2.1.x and 2.0.x. I do not know yet if this is possible. I hope it is.
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: maven-artifact patches
Posted by Mark Hobson <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 29/08/2007, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
> I would very much like to try and get both versions of Maven to use
> it. If at all possibly we should try this and between you, myself,
> Patrick and Ralph we can probably determine if this is possible. If
> we decide we have to mimic bugs then it might not be worth it. But I
> would definitely consolidate your work in the separated maven-
> artifact as that's what 2.1 is using now.
Cool, that sounds good. I haven't checked the differences between
maven-artifact in 2.0.x and 2.1.x, but I assume the remaining work is
to integrate it into 2.0.x? I'd be happy to help if I can find some
free time. Let me know the plans.
Cheers,
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: maven-artifact patches
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 29 Aug 07, at 6:53 AM 29 Aug 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> Apologies for the delayed reply - been a little busy of recent and
> just catching up on my inbox. What's the plan here, to consolidate
> maven-artifact between 2.0.x and 2.1.x? Sounds good to me. The work
> I did on MNG-612 is branched off 2.0.x at the moment.
>
> Let me know if I can help. Although my free time is a little limited
> at the moment, I'd like to see a conclusion to MNG-612.
>
I would very much like to try and get both versions of Maven to use
it. If at all possibly we should try this and between you, myself,
Patrick and Ralph we can probably determine if this is possible. If
we decide we have to mimic bugs then it might not be worth it. But I
would definitely consolidate your work in the separated maven-
artifact as that's what 2.1 is using now.
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> On 21/08/2007, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
>> Mark,
>>
>> If you are going to be around today I was going to apply some patches
>> and do some fixes but I wanted to get some feedback about attempting
>> to use the same separate code now in maven-artifact. It would be far
>> better to use the same code for both 2.0.x and 2.1.x and I don't
>> believe they are wildly divergent at this point. We just need to make
>> sure that anything using the resolver directly or the repository
>> metadata still gets everything it needs from the unified maven-
>> artifact.
>>
>> We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
>> maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much
>> easier.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: maven-artifact patches
Posted by Mark Hobson <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hi Jason,
Apologies for the delayed reply - been a little busy of recent and
just catching up on my inbox. What's the plan here, to consolidate
maven-artifact between 2.0.x and 2.1.x? Sounds good to me. The work
I did on MNG-612 is branched off 2.0.x at the moment.
Let me know if I can help. Although my free time is a little limited
at the moment, I'd like to see a conclusion to MNG-612.
Cheers,
Mark
On 21/08/2007, Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> If you are going to be around today I was going to apply some patches
> and do some fixes but I wanted to get some feedback about attempting
> to use the same separate code now in maven-artifact. It would be far
> better to use the same code for both 2.0.x and 2.1.x and I don't
> believe they are wildly divergent at this point. We just need to make
> sure that anything using the resolver directly or the repository
> metadata still gets everything it needs from the unified maven-artifact.
>
> We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
> maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much easier.
>
> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: maven-artifact patches
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
On 21 Aug 07, at 8:49 PM 21 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
> On 22/08/2007, at 1:10 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
>> maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much
>> easier.
>
> I'm really not in favour of this. Isn't the investment better
> placed in working towards a shippable 2.1 with a shorter timeframe
> and smaller set of requirements than are currently in JIRA?
>
I think creating a transition for people moving from 2.0.x to 2.1x is
equally important, and at this point the investment might total a
week to prevent us from having to maintain two lines of the artifact
mechanism. If it takes longer then a week then I would cut short the
endeavour, but there are some critical bugs that need to be fixed and
even some features that can benefit the 2.0.x users.
The container is somewhat questionable as that will take a bit of
time, it just makes the transition easier for users. This I could
pass on.
The maven-artifact sharing I think is of value. It essentially boils
down to flipping the dependency, checking how old code was using the
existing maven-artifact, look at any filtering we have to do, any
name changes that may ease the burden of using the new in the old and
assess. I don't see this taking longer then a week. I just don't want
to look at two lines of such an important sub-system and we're at the
point where the divergence is not that great.
> Once the regressions are fixed, the things that have already been
> done are enough to constitute a feature release IMO.
>
> Cheers,
> 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: maven-artifact patches
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 22/08/2007, at 1:10 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> We're going to end up with two code lines to maintain but sharing
> maven-artifact (and possibly the container) would make it much easier.
I'm really not in favour of this. Isn't the investment better placed
in working towards a shippable 2.1 with a shorter timeframe and
smaller set of requirements than are currently in JIRA?
Once the regressions are fixed, the things that have already been
done are enough to constitute a feature release IMO.
Cheers,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org