Quoting Michel Alexandre Salim (2012-06-14 09:31:20) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Yes, I've already noticed several bugs in maven2 subpackages -- > normally when some compatibility submodules are not shipped, but it > turns out that the ones that are shipped depend on Maven submodules > where the APIs have changed between 2.x and 3.x. Well my personal goal is to get rid of as much maven2 as possible. If it was possible the package would not exist already, but alas...there is still some need for it > > Speaking of which, could someone take a look at this maven2 bugfix > request? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830933 I have seen the bug (I am effectively maven2 maintainer), but I didn't want to commit anything yet. Now, we have a changes to the guidelines in the pipeline[1] which would make it possible to package compat version of maven2 artifacts (even those that conflict with maven-3.x in gid:aid). It would mean we could restructure maven2 package in a bit different way. After that I'd gladly let others package additional artifacts. > > > Another issue is that current Maven was bootstrapped using older > > maven2 package. However we don't have that anymore and > > bootstrapping maven would have to be reworked from scratch. > > > We'd actually only need maven2 at the moment -- do you see many issues > in making that available for EPEL? It's not a high priority for us > right now (see first paragraph of response), but it seems to me that > the longer we wait the harder it'd be to do the bootstrapping. It's in the same boat as maven-3.x basically. maven-2.2.1 was bootstrapped using maven-2.0.8. And how it worked before I can only guess because that's from before my time :-) You would still be looking at packaging a lot of additional dependencies. > > In short: no one really tried to get Maven 3.x into EPEL because > > just figuring out scope of such task is non-trivial. There's too > > many unknowns in play there. > > > That's understandable. It looks like if we're going to do this we > (those who want to see Maven in EPEL) would have to commit to > maintaining the EPEL 6 branch ourselves. Probably going to give EPEL 5 > a miss altogether. Yup. If anything than 6... [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate#Compatibility_packages -- Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com -- java-devel mailing list java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
