You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Geoffrey De Smet <ge...@gmail.com> on 2007/04/11 17:20:03 UTC
Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 ->
lock down of plugin versions
>> "they need to specify versions for all of their plugins in the POM"
>
> We can't do this in 2.0.x but it needs to be mandatory in 2.1.
>
Good! :)
In my experience with spring-richclient most of the problems of an
instable build went away the day I locked down all versions.
However you could do 2 things to make our lives easier:
1) Bundle a bunch of plugins together in a version so we can just
specify that bundle.
Say for example "we use plugin-bundle 2.0.6" (which means we use
assembly 2.0, site 2.0-beta5, ...).
Of course it should be possible to make an exception on a single plugin
in that bundle to give it another version anyway.
Plugin-bundles would allow you to test more thoroughly if all plugins
work together nicely.
2) A site report (and maybe also a mvn cmd) to receive a list of all
plugins which can be updated. (This would be very welcome for
dependencies too btw.)
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions
Posted by John Casey <ca...@gmail.com>.
The idea originally was that LATEST might refer to a snapshot release, but
that RELEASE was the latest plugin release. Of course, all of this
completely ignores any notion of versions that have implications for
backward compatibility. In the Maven 2.0.x, all plugin releases are assumed
to be minor/point releases of the same major version.
-john
On 4/11/07, Brian E. Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu> wrote:
>
> I never use either to be honest so I'm not actually sure what the
> difference is.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barrie Treloar [mailto:baerrach@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:44 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1
> -> lock down of plugin versions
>
> On 4/12/07, Brian E. Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu> wrote:
> > I think if we just change the plugin resolution so that it doesn't
> > assume "RELEASE" if no version is set, it should be pretty easy right?
> > IE someone can still put RELEASE as a version if they want to, but we
> > would require something to be set and not just assume it. Or should we
> > abandon RELEASE all together?
>
> Is this because LATEST and RELEASE might not be the same thing?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
I never use either to be honest so I'm not actually sure what the
difference is.
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrie Treloar [mailto:baerrach@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:44 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1
-> lock down of plugin versions
On 4/12/07, Brian E. Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu> wrote:
> I think if we just change the plugin resolution so that it doesn't
> assume "RELEASE" if no version is set, it should be pretty easy right?
> IE someone can still put RELEASE as a version if they want to, but we
> would require something to be set and not just assume it. Or should we
> abandon RELEASE all together?
Is this because LATEST and RELEASE might not be the same thing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions
Posted by Barrie Treloar <ba...@gmail.com>.
On 4/12/07, Brian E. Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu> wrote:
> I think if we just change the plugin resolution so that it doesn't
> assume "RELEASE" if no version is set, it should be pretty easy right?
> IE someone can still put RELEASE as a version if they want to, but we
> would require something to be set and not just assume it. Or should we
> abandon RELEASE all together?
Is this because LATEST and RELEASE might not be the same thing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
I think if we just change the plugin resolution so that it doesn't
assume "RELEASE" if no version is set, it should be pretty easy right?
IE someone can still put RELEASE as a version if they want to, but we
would require something to be set and not just assume it. Or should we
abandon RELEASE all together?
-----Original Message-----
From: Arik Kfir [mailto:arikkfir@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 12:39 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1
-> lock down of plugin versions
+1 for that!
On 4/11/07, Geoffrey De Smet <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >> "they need to specify versions for all of their plugins in the
POM"
> >
> > We can't do this in 2.0.x but it needs to be mandatory in 2.1.
> >
>
> Good! :)
>
> In my experience with spring-richclient most of the problems of an
> instable build went away the day I locked down all versions.
>
> However you could do 2 things to make our lives easier:
>
> 1) Bundle a bunch of plugins together in a version so we can just
> specify that bundle.
> Say for example "we use plugin-bundle 2.0.6" (which means we use
> assembly 2.0, site 2.0-beta5, ...).
> Of course it should be possible to make an exception on a single
> plugin in that bundle to give it another version anyway.
>
> Plugin-bundles would allow you to test more thoroughly if all plugins
> work together nicely.
>
> 2) A site report (and maybe also a mvn cmd) to receive a list of all
> plugins which can be updated. (This would be very welcome for
> dependencies too btw.)
>
> With kind regards,
> Geoffrey De Smet
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [vote] Attempt 3: Release maven-assembly-plugin 2.2-beta-1 -> lock down of plugin versions
Posted by Arik Kfir <ar...@gmail.com>.
+1 for that!
On 4/11/07, Geoffrey De Smet <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >> "they need to specify versions for all of their plugins in the POM"
> >
> > We can't do this in 2.0.x but it needs to be mandatory in 2.1.
> >
>
> Good! :)
>
> In my experience with spring-richclient most of the problems of an
> instable build went away the day I locked down all versions.
>
> However you could do 2 things to make our lives easier:
>
> 1) Bundle a bunch of plugins together in a version so we can just
> specify that bundle.
> Say for example "we use plugin-bundle 2.0.6" (which means we use
> assembly 2.0, site 2.0-beta5, ...).
> Of course it should be possible to make an exception on a single plugin
> in that bundle to give it another version anyway.
>
> Plugin-bundles would allow you to test more thoroughly if all plugins
> work together nicely.
>
> 2) A site report (and maybe also a mvn cmd) to receive a list of all
> plugins which can be updated. (This would be very welcome for
> dependencies too btw.)
>
> With kind regards,
> Geoffrey De Smet
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>