| 1 |
On 24 May 2011, at 14:37, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 05/23/2011 07:52 PM, Kasun Gajasinghe wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> maven-bin 2.x support continues to work through the binary package? |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Yes, we can keep supporting maven-bin 2.x for maven users. Though the |
| 9 |
>> packagers of projects based on maven won't be able to use the support |
| 10 |
>> for maven 2.x if we start with 3.x.This project's focus is more |
| 11 |
>> towards packagers, right? I think Serkan or people who are more |
| 12 |
>> familiar with this can give an exact answer. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So are you discussing which version of Maven to build from source or |
| 16 |
> which version to target ebuild infrastructure for? Those two don't |
| 17 |
> necessarily need to be the same and your topic implied the former but |
| 18 |
> the above talks about the latter. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Well, mainly this project is inclined towards packagers. |
| 21 |
But of course the users are targeted too. Currently, users have the |
| 22 |
maven-bin too |
| 23 |
which means they have a choice in hand. The problem with Maven 3 is |
| 24 |
that some important plugins for users are not |
| 25 |
supported yet. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> The ebuild infrastructure for Maven |
| 28 |
> based projects should work just the same regardless of whether the |
| 29 |
> maven |
| 30 |
> package itself is built from source or not. Our target is of course to |
| 31 |
> get rid of all binary packages but I consider this thread about asking |
| 32 |
> about priorities. For ebuild infrastructure targeting 2.x is fine if |
| 33 |
> the |
| 34 |
> large majority of projects that will start using the work are using |
| 35 |
> 2.x. |
| 36 |
> Otherwise I think my earlier logic still applies. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Indeed the large majority of the projects are using 2.x AFAIK. May be all? ;) |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
IMHO, it's better if we start with 2.x. Bumping to 3.x from there |
| 41 |
isn't a big deal. And, by that time maven 3 would be much matured too. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Personally, I'm not switching my projects to 3.x because there's actually no |
| 44 |
mind blowing reason. Only difference is the speed and the better error |
| 45 |
reporting. These features doesn't deserve such a version increment anyway. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
I think Petteri is OK with 2.x based on your comments? If there's no |
| 48 |
further arguments from others, I'd like to go ahead with 2.x. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Thanks, |
| 51 |
--Kasun |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
> |
Archives