Re: Maven from source - version 2.x or 3.x ?

Petteri Räty <[email protected]> Mon, 23 May 2011 00:54:02 +0300
Newsgroups gmane.linux.gentoo.java
Message-ID <[email protected]>
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigC7E2E004127E7ACEB4764CF4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 05/22/2011 05:54 PM, Eric Chatellier wrote:
> Le 22/05/2011 07:38, Kasun Gajasinghe a =C3=A9crit :
>> Hi all,
>> I'm working on getting Apache Maven in to work by building from
>> source. Currently, in main tree, Maven is installed using the binary
>> (dev-java/maven-bin), which is against the Gentoo Java Packaging
>> Policy.
>>
>> Getting Maven in to work by building-from-source is a lengthy process.=

>> We have two main versions to go ahead. The 2.x range with the latest
>> being v2.2.1, and the 3.x range with the latest being v3.0.3. The
>> compatibility notes for 2.x and 3.x are at [1]. There's only few
>> compatibility issues as I've seen. I was thinking to go with 2.x since=

>> in my experience and the area where I was involved in, haven't had any=

>> plans to migrate to Maven 3.x soon. But the overall picture may vary.
>>
>> So, I'm asking from the Gentoo's Java community, what's the suitable
>> version to go with? 2.x or 3.x
> Hi, i'm a gentoo user and java developper using maven for
> years. I also known the maven gentoo problem ;)
> So i'll be happy to help you or test your work.
>=20
> For maven 2/3, 3.x is a new achitecture intended to
> be maven 2 complaint. So, i vote for 3.x.
> But maybe 3.x is too young...
>=20

Eventually 2.x will die while 3.x continues to be supported and so on. I
would target 3.x and then do 2.x also if it's relative easy to backport.
If they are largely compatible as you say then targeting 3.x shouldn't
be a problem knowledge wise.

Regards,
Petteri


--------------enigC7E2E004127E7ACEB4764CF4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=eRaa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enigC7E2E004127E7ACEB4764CF4--