| 1 |
On 05/22/2011 05:54 PM, Eric Chatellier wrote: |
| 2 |
> Le 22/05/2011 07:38, Kasun Gajasinghe a écrit : |
| 3 |
>> Hi all, |
| 4 |
>> I'm working on getting Apache Maven in to work by building from |
| 5 |
>> source. Currently, in main tree, Maven is installed using the binary |
| 6 |
>> (dev-java/maven-bin), which is against the Gentoo Java Packaging |
| 7 |
>> Policy. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Getting Maven in to work by building-from-source is a lengthy process. |
| 10 |
>> We have two main versions to go ahead. The 2.x range with the latest |
| 11 |
>> being v2.2.1, and the 3.x range with the latest being v3.0.3. The |
| 12 |
>> compatibility notes for 2.x and 3.x are at [1]. There's only few |
| 13 |
>> compatibility issues as I've seen. I was thinking to go with 2.x since |
| 14 |
>> in my experience and the area where I was involved in, haven't had any |
| 15 |
>> plans to migrate to Maven 3.x soon. But the overall picture may vary. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> So, I'm asking from the Gentoo's Java community, what's the suitable |
| 18 |
>> version to go with? 2.x or 3.x |
| 19 |
> Hi, i'm a gentoo user and java developper using maven for |
| 20 |
> years. I also known the maven gentoo problem ;) |
| 21 |
> So i'll be happy to help you or test your work. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> For maven 2/3, 3.x is a new achitecture intended to |
| 24 |
> be maven 2 complaint. So, i vote for 3.x. |
| 25 |
> But maybe 3.x is too young... |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Eventually 2.x will die while 3.x continues to be supported and so on. I |
| 29 |
would target 3.x and then do 2.x also if it's relative easy to backport. |
| 30 |
If they are largely compatible as you say then targeting 3.x shouldn't |
| 31 |
be a problem knowledge wise. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Regards, |
| 34 |
Petteri |
Archives