|Paul Benedict||Dec 26, 2009 2:33 am|
|Brett Porter||Dec 28, 2009 5:12 pm|
|Brian Fox||Dec 28, 2009 6:38 pm|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 28, 2009 6:44 pm|
|Brett Porter||Dec 28, 2009 7:34 pm|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 28, 2009 9:12 pm|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 28, 2009 9:48 pm|
|Stephen Connolly||Dec 28, 2009 11:59 pm|
|Ralph Goers||Dec 29, 2009 1:14 am|
|Arnaud HERITIER||Dec 29, 2009 1:17 am|
|Mark Struberg||Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am|
|Benjamin Bentmann||Dec 29, 2009 2:52 am|
|Brett Porter||Dec 29, 2009 7:19 am|
|Brett Porter||Dec 29, 2009 7:24 am|
|Brett Porter||Dec 29, 2009 7:33 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 7:40 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 7:41 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 7:46 am|
|Ralph Goers||Dec 29, 2009 8:25 am|
|Arnaud HERITIER||Dec 29, 2009 8:27 am|
|Stephen Connolly||Dec 29, 2009 8:40 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 8:45 am|
|Arnaud HERITIER||Dec 29, 2009 8:53 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 9:06 am|
|Stephen Connolly||Dec 29, 2009 9:21 am|
|Kristian Rosenvold||Dec 29, 2009 9:48 am|
|Ralph Goers||Dec 29, 2009 10:23 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 10:24 am|
|Kristian Rosenvold||Dec 29, 2009 10:57 am|
|Brian Fox||Dec 29, 2009 10:58 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 11:05 am|
|Stephen Connolly||Dec 29, 2009 11:08 am|
|Kristian Rosenvold||Dec 29, 2009 11:26 am|
|Arnaud HERITIER||Dec 29, 2009 11:30 am|
|Jason van Zyl||Dec 29, 2009 11:40 am|
|Christian Edward Gruber||Dec 29, 2009 2:07 pm|
|Brett Porter||Dec 29, 2009 4:37 pm|
|Brett Porter||Dec 29, 2009 4:39 pm|
|19 later messages|
|Subject:||Re: Maven 2.2.2 soon?|
|From:||Brett Porter (bre...@apache.org)|
|Date:||Dec 29, 2009 7:19:26 am|
On 29/12/2009, at 4:12 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
For example, where are the issues that reflect switching to Guice and OSGi that
we keep hearing about?
Neither of those are going to happen in the 3.0 time line.
Ok, I think there has been some confusion on this and other parts in terms of
timing. It makes it much easier to understand where things are going if the JIRA
roadmap (post-cleanup) reflects reality.
I just added one for slf4j that you mentioned. What other things are planned
that are not in there so we can drive towards a goal?
I think we're done to be honest. If JIRA could be trimmed down, by clearing out
the silliness, and starting to validate that issues marks as bugs have been
fixed in 3.x then that will get us most of the way there. For what remains
trying to bug fix and write ITs is really the only thing left I really want to
Using SLF4J as the API will really amount to working over time at injecting a
logger with the SLF4J API instead of the Plexus API one. At very least maybe we
can cleanup the Plexus SLF4J stuff so that if we do provide a way to configure
the logging using standard SLF4J stuff it won't change when we change the API
internally. We are doing a lot of logging and tracing work in Nexus and
M2Eclipse right now so some of this might fall out of that and go back into
Maven but if someone else wants to tackle that it would be cool.
I've mucked with this a number of times to unify things so don't mind working on
it, but it seems more like a 3.1 thing to tackle because of the repercussions it
might have. Also, doesn't OSGi provide logging facilities that it might be
better to take advantage of if it is going to be there?
I'd also avoid planning 3.1 alphas at this stage. Focus on getting 3.0 out, and
everything else that is after 3.0 can be up for grabs.
There I'm only trying to collect things that we cannot change in 3.0. If I've
seen things like POM changes I've just been pushing it into 3.0.alpha1.
Yep... would it be ok to just fold all those into a "3.1" version and split that
into buckets later when it is being worked on, to reduce the noise?