lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Rutherglen <jason.rutherg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: discussion about release frequency.
Date Sat, 18 Sep 2010 20:45:10 GMT
> the maven stuff in 3.x/trunk is actually pretty good

I've heard that about every release of Maven, and any time I've tried
to use it, it doesn't quite work as expected, and given what it does
should be fairly trivial, the fact that there bugs/issues, and it's
been released to me has meant I don't want to use it.  It's like a
toaster that also plays videos, I just want a toaster, thanks.

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryantxu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, you have always claimed that as de jure, I think defacto is that
>>> it's part of the release. And the defacto is to follow the 'release to
>>> do' best as makes sense (I'm not sure the Solr release to do wiki always
>>> makes much sense). I've been waiting for the day that you release Lucene
>>> and drop all consideration for Maven as you have said you would likely
>>> do - but I think most of us feel it's pretty much on the list and this
>>> general agreement will free us of our conscious. I was ready to follow
>>> your coat tails to freedom, but this way lets me off easier I think.
>>>
>>
>> Just my opinion: (personally i do not use maven, nor understand it).
>> If maven support is beneficial to bringing more devs to lucene, we should
>> consider what we can do.
>> But at the same time, perhaps Makefiles would bring more devs, too.
>> My problem with releasing with maven is that i could not honestly even +1 my
>> own release artifacts, because i don't know what the hell is going on with
>> the maven artifacts.
>> There has to be a way to let the "maven experts" take care of this stuff
>> somehow, if its really going to be beneficial.
>
> As a maven user (not an expert by any means), the maven stuff in
> 3.x/trunk is actually pretty good.  Running:
>  ant generate-maven-artifacts -Dmaven.dist.dir=maven -Dversion=4.0.rxxx
> makes a folder (maven) with everything it needs.  This is *very* easy
> for maven apps to test against.
>
> What are the deploy steps that we are talking about dropping/changing?
>
>
> - - - -
>
> As an aside, I still think it is worth changing our dev builds from
> "-dev.jar" to "-SNAPSHOT.jar" so that the daily builds are
> automatically valid SNAPSHOT builds that are easy for maven/ivy users
> to work with.  (LUCENE-2493)  As is, maven users have to checkout and
> build with a special version to test/use a dev build -- since this is
> more work then many people want to deal with, we find problems with
> the maven pom files *after* the official release.
>
>
> ryan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message