Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.210 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=XS9O7LqAMSanDGg7mi8SOBbSD0ZbjgxA6Dw7Xb1qcKAqwVLeZkOf2AZmxDMGoAxMHz
         zvGNaRRHT0ZT4v12prkvdiY/k8sp5sTmv37IUw/fQSBoz84wV7jkYK/DSW+t+p18QNk7
         Nf/8PVbCjr+QZfgSCp1ae9rzUXRVAYxouMWuw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55afdc851002231838g957592axde0271423901d016@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55afdc851002231629ra623eefk376b997f57ee120e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <25aac9fc1002231707x22909ff4h6171229f276f03d@mail.gmail.com>
	 <55afdc851002231838g957592axde0271423901d016@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:40:35 +0000
Message-ID: <25aac9fc1002240840h1910a352qe382ce164ede897e@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [all] Preparing for commons-parent pom release
From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 24/02/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:07 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > On 24/02/2010, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >> I'd like to do a release of the commons-parent pom - primarily to
>  >>  upgrade to the latest commons-build-plugin 1.2 release.
>  >>
>  >>  I have also upgraded the plugin versions and changed the "rc" &
>  >>  "release" profiles to now only produce the javadocs and not the whole
>  >>  site (this resolves a problem for multi-module components).
>  >>
>  >>  Are there any other changes or feedback before calling a vote on this?
>  >
>  > I think the default maven.compile.source|target entries should be
>  > removed from the POM.
>  >
>  > Seems to me that projects should have to define these, and not rely on
>  > the default.
>
>
> I disagree with this because the whole point of the commons-parent
>  pom.xml is to reduce the amount of dulicate configuration in component
>  projects and I see no benefit in forcing components to define
>  unnecessary properties when the default suits them.

But the compilation source and target are specific to each project,
just like inceptionYear.

Unlike other properties, such as plugin versions, the source and
target versions can never be updated in the parent pom. If it is
updated, that all projects that are currently relying on the default
will have to be updated to override the parent pom. At which point the
parent pom properties become useless anyway.

It's also tedious trying to find the JVM requirements if one has to
look in both the project pom and the parent pom.

>  I also think this is a non-issue. We have a good history over the past
>  few years of making sure components are compatible with the JDK
>  version they target and I don't believe theres a single example of a
>  release that had these properties incorrectly set.
>  Also we did have this discussion before:
>
>  http://markmail.org/message/sc2d7efxscz6n3sz
>

I know, and I still disagree.

>  Niall
>
>
>  >>  Niall
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org