| Re: [m2e-wtp-dev] [m2e-dev] Breaking changes to the archetype API -> m2e 2.0? |
Greg,only internal m2e classes have been modified, but the archetype runtime doesn't expose the same Maven classes anymore (org.apache.maven.archetype.Archetype -> ArchetypeManager) so... it might not even apply for a major version bump after all. that's debatable I guess.Here's the extent of the changes, so far : https://github.com/eclipse/m2e-core/compare/master...fbricon:archetyper-2.x?expand=1If we can keep on with 1.6 with these changes, fine by me :-)The downside of moving to 2.0 is a lot of m2e extensions would probably need to be rebuilt if they use version ranges like [1.0, 2.0). That's impacts definitely more adopters than the handful that depends on the archetype API.On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:02 PM, Greg Amerson <gregory.amerson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:_______________________________________________Hey Fred,Just want to clarify some of the APIs that may be changing. In our adopter product we have code that looks like this:final ArchetypeManager archetypeManager = MavenPluginActivator.getDefault().getArchetypeManager();final ArtifactRepository remoteArchetypeRepository = archetypeManager.getArchetypeRepository( archetype );...final List<IProject> newProjects =projectConfigurationManager.createArchetypeProjects(location, archetype, groupId, artifactId, version, javaPackage, properties, configuration, monitor );I'm assuming you mean some of these APIs will change in incompatible ways in the proposed m2e 2.0? Well I guess ArchetypeManager was always marked internal, so its fair game to be changed even if m2e doesn't go to 2.0. But the IProjectConfigurationManager was "API", so is that one of the interfaces that will undergo breaking change in 2.0?--On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl <jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Is there any downside at all to upgrading? If you've done the work and fixed all those issues I'm super happy you've moved us forward.
Honestly I doubt anyone has tied into the guts of Archetype aside from you and really I think it's a small price to pay if the odd party is. You've updated the code and I assume made it easier to deal with so I only see upside.
+1
> _______________________________________________
On Mar 18, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Fred Bricon <fbricon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an initial POC that uses maven-archetype-plugin 2.3, instead of the 2.0.alpha4 version (which was released in the 17th century, give or take).
>
> I checked it fixes the following issues :
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/459453,
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/424010,
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/394918,
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/374660,
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/405945 (on OSX at least),
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/415114,
> - https://bugs.eclipse.org/429287
>
> Bugs https://bugs.eclipse.org/446657, https://bugs.eclipse.org/348893 may or not be fixed (I can't test proxies)
>
> Most of these issues were automatically closed already after 1 year of inactivity. Doesn't mean the bugs are not there. My level of annoyance just reached a point where I'd like to take action now.
>
> The only problem with the archetype update is it will break 3rd party adopters (JBoss Tools at least) depending on the archetype API (package/class names changed between 2.0.alpha4 and 2.3). I don't plan on introducing a compatibility layer, not worth the hassle IMHO.
> Given that I'm also in charge of the JBoss Tools integration, I'm fine with the impact :-)
>
> Getting the fix in will require m2e to bump its version to 2.0 (and open a bunch of CQs in ipzilla)
>
> I'd really like to get that change in for Eclipse Mars, if possible. Is it too late from a release plan standpoint (i.e. 1.6 -> 2.0)? PMC, fellow m2e committers wdyt?
>
> Fred
>
> --
> "Have you tried turning it off and on again" - The IT Crowd
> m2e-dev mailing list
> m2e-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-dev
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Takari and Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
http://twitter.com/takari_io
---------------------------------------------------------
First, the taking in of scattered particulars under one Idea,
so that everyone understands what is being talked about ... Second,
the separation of the Idea into parts, by dividing it at the joints,
as nature directs, not breaking any limb in half as a bad carver might.
-- Plato, Phaedrus (Notes on the Synthesis of Form by C. Alexander)
_______________________________________________
m2e-dev mailing list
m2e-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-dev
m2e-wtp-dev mailing list
m2e-wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-wtp-dev--"Have you tried turning it off and on again" - The IT Crowd
_______________________________________________
m2e-wtp-dev mailing list
m2e-wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-wtp-dev