Re: [jbosstools-dev] [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... If 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(a)liferay.com&gt; 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(a)takari.io&gt; 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(a)gmail.com&gt; 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(a)eclipse.org >> > 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(a)eclipse.org >> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe >> from this list, visit >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-dev >> > > > > -- > Greg Amerson > Liferay Developer Tools > Liferay, Inc. www.liferay.com > > _______________________________________________ > m2e-wtp-dev mailing list > m2e-wtp-dev(a)eclipse.org > 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(a)eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-wtp-dev