Mailing-List: contact dev-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sochotnicky@redhat.com
 designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@redhat.com>
User-Agent: alot/0.3.1+
To: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
References: <20120730114443.5364.20616@dhcp-25-142.brq.redhat.com>
 <CA+nPnMwo=n5G-JPR_Mjgc8iF_v0N+HWxrz09QwaKkvMYbjVq4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <7FAC5641-A482-4278-ADF6-161C3F22EF0C@tesla.io>
 <20120817103312.9124.93190@dhcp-25-142.brq.redhat.com>
 <CA+nPnMzngFOwb2fpcSCJ_ePi9HLM7W=gD55GXbOWzT7TZBr23A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+nPnMzngFOwb2fpcSCJ_ePi9HLM7W=gD55GXbOWzT7TZBr23A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120817162439.26135.9944@dhcp-25-142.brq.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Updating dependencies on Maven 2.x to Maven 3.x in plugins?
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 18:24:39 +0200


Quoting Stephen Connolly (2012-08-17 13:32:54)
> If in 50 years time that means that there is still some Maven plugins that
> depend on some of the published Maven APIs from Maven 2.0 then that is a
> success on behalf of the Maven developers, not a failure to force people =
to
> upgrade.

I honestly didn't mean to make this into fail/win type scenario.

> > In any case, you've made your opinion clear so I have a different
> > question then :-) Is there any timeframe you have in mind for this
> > transition to happen? 2 years? 5 years? 10 years? Never? I *assume*
> > there will come a time where 2.0.11 and 2.2.1 will have to die (i.e not
> > be featured as download options). I would guess the transition would
> > start at least then.
> >
> =

> Apache releases never die (which is why we cannot stop people (a.k.a.
> fools) downloading Maven 2.1.0)

I'll try to be less metaphorical next time. I meant when they will stop
to be supported by their developers.


> The links are there to help users that have specific requirements for Mav=
en
> versions, but there is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from going and
> downloading the older versions, e.g.
> http://archive.apache.org/dist/maven/binaries/

I am aware of archive, but having download available does not mean that
version is alive. Or should I try bugreporting against those old
versions? My guess is that those bugs would be just closed as "won't
fix". So in that sense, I believe 3.x is basically the only alive
version of Maven. 2.2.x and 2.0.x branches will likely not receive any
security or any major fixes. For you they are "done", and there's
nothing wrong with that really, but for me it means those versions have
no active upstream (pretty please take this with a grain of salt). Hence
the curiosity.

> We will probably drop the link for Maven 2.2.1 once we get to Maven 3.1 or
> Maven 4.0 (depends on how big a change we think things are)
> =

> I would suspect that a 3.1 or 4.0 might consider dropping support for JRE
> 1.5 (given that 1.6 is nearing EOL) in which case we would probably retain
> a link to the last version that only requires JRE 1.5 such as we are
> currently doing for JRE 1.4 (i.e. the 2.0.11 link). Whether we would drop
> the 2.0.11 link at that point in time is a different question.

OK. I can live with uncertainty and speculations. This is enough for me.

Thank you!

-- =

Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@redhat.com>
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno

PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc.                               http://cz.redhat.com

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