Hi Andrew, On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 10:44:07AM -0800, Andrew Schurman wrote: > > Based on the history of the repo, it appears to be the same project by > the same author. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to use this > new repo. If you want to be extra cautious, you could compare source of > the sources.jar in maven central to one of the old tags in github to > see if there are any significant changes. > > In fact, I believe most debian projects use a slightly different > version of plugins than what is called for in the project so that we > can deploy a single version in debian. Sometimes this means security > fixes. Other times, there is no benefit.
OK, I admit I have also a better feeling when using the latest version. So I'll change the packaging to use this. > > Or may be I should write a d/watch > > file containing > > > > > > https://github.com/davidB/scala-maven-plugin/releases?after=3.1.1 > > .*/archive/v*(2\.[\d.-]+)\.(?:tar(?:\.gz|\.bz2)?|tgz) > > > > > > which is a bit weak but fetches (at least at this point in time) the > > latest version of scala-maven-plugin 2.x - which seems to be the old > > version you were suggesting to use. > > The purpose of the watch file is to check for new releases. Sure. > I believe > github releases are ordered by date, so you'll have to remove the > ?after=3.1.1. If the author happens create a hotfix 2.x branch and > another release, you'll miss it since the new release would be before > (date ordered) 3.1.1. Yes, I tried to mention this very weak hack in a remark. My assumption was based on the hope that hotfixes on 2.x are not very probable. > I don't have any better ideas for you. It sounds like a good approach > to me. You could also send a patch upstream to upgrade to the latest > scala-maven-plugin which means less smoke and mirrors in the future. I'll just try with the latest scala-maven-plugin and will ask here for help (as always if I might run into heavy problems. Thanks for your comments Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
