Fine with me :) On 03/16/2012 10:16 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: > +1. > > Colm. > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:43 PM, Christian Schneider > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I see no problem in requiring maven 3. It was a long time since I last used >> maven 2 :-) >> >> Christian >> >> Am 15.03.2012 20:42, schrieb Daniel Kulp: >> >>> I just discovered an issue with Maven 2.2.1 that is preventing the OSGi >>> manifest in the little bundles from being correct. I'm not really sure >>> what the issue is, but basically with 2.2.1, it's SOMETIMES losing the >>> "resolution:=optional" stuff on packages coming from jars marked optional. >>> However, it only seems to do it from the full reactor build. >>> >>> For example, if you run: >>> >>> mvn install -Pfastinstall -pl rt/bindings/xml -am >>> >>> and then look at: >>> rt/bindings/xml/target/classes/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF >>> >>> with 3.0.4, you get the optionals on the stuff from tools. With 2.2.1, >>> you >>> don't. What complicates it even more is if you cd into rt/binding/xml >>> and >>> run mvn install with 2.2.1, it generates the correct manifest. >>> >>> We may be able to work around the issue by explicitely setting optionals >>> in >>> the bundle-plugin instructions, but that means a lot more work for us. >>> Plus, we'd have to go though ALL the bundles and run with both 3.x and >>> 2.2.1 >>> and check for other differences and such. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Christian Schneider >> http://www.liquid-reality.de >> >> Open Source Architect >> Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com >> > > >
-- Alessio Soldano Web Service Lead, JBoss
