On the @Experimental api, I just want to restate what I had in mind : * release 4.0 without publicizing the new API * finalize 4.x plugins to make them ready for consumption, this could use a few iterations of Maven over the coming months (4.1, 4.2, etc...) * when that's done, remove the @Experimental flag and release all plugins in GA Basically, ship the API in a "tech preview" mode. We don't make the API public, we don't tell people to migrate their plugins yet... But 4.0 brings much more than the API...
Le sam. 14 févr. 2026 à 10:25, Maarten Mulders <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi all, > > A few days ago, Matthias started a thread [1] to identify what needs to > be done before we could release Maven 4.0.0. He explicitly asked not to > reopen previous discussions in that thread - that's why I'm opening a > new one. > > In that thread was a reply from Elliotte where he raised his concerns on > a couple of issues in the current codebase. I will try to summarise: > > 1. Maven 4.0.0 should not come with an XML namespace change. > 2. We cannot introduce "experimental" API's; similarly, we can't > "deprecate" API's without proper documentation about their replacement. > 3. Unnecessary complication in basic functionality. > > Elliotte, please feel free to elaborate and/or refer back to earlier > mailing list threads where those things have been raised. > > The thing I would like to discuss in this thread: **do we feel > comfortable releasing Maven 4.0.0 in this state?** > > My personal opinion on the above three points: > > 1. I do not have enough knowledge to judge on this. When in doubt, do > not proceed - I would like to hear the experts voices on this before > deciding to cut a release. > > 2. I very much agree here. If we can't even say that usage of the > (deprecated) method-X now needs to call the (new) method-Y, then who > can? We owe it to people building on top of Maven to provide them with > guidance. Also, releasing "experimental" API's is not a sign of "yes, > this is an improvement of what we had and you should all use this". It's > been around for well over a year in various beta and RC releases, I > think we need to decide if we keep them or remove them. > > 3. This personally worries me the least, *as long as those interfaces > are not part of our public API/SPI*. If they are only internal, we could > safely remove them and simplify in 4.0.x or 4.x.y. If those interfaces > are for public consumption, then we might want to reconsider if they > could become non-public. > > > Curious to hear your thoughts on this. As much as I would love to see > Maven 4 go public, I *don't* want to ship software we know is in a > broken state. > > > Thanks, > > > Maarten > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/d07wpod69spl6trt1cy5ykzs2971414j > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet
