Morgan Delagrange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/01/2003 06:28:47 PM:
> > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Morgan Delagrange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on > > 04/01/2003 09:01:57 AM: > > > > > Hey all, > > > > > > In my short experience with requesting updates to > > the > > > Maven repository, it seems to take hours if not > > days. > > Owwww....I was asleep! > > > > Boy, you Maven folks are deep sleepers: > > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=turbine-maven-dev&m=104155973415577&w=2 > http://www.ibiblio.org/maven/commons-jelly/jars/ > > Hello, is anybody home? Hello, did you give us the jar file in the right format? > All irony aside, the obvious point is that until we > can effect our own immediate Maven repository > gratification, Maven's still kind of crappy for > refactoring. GUMP, while not immediate, is a definite Ah, dump the SNAPSHOT in your *local* repository if you want to refactor and test something. It doesn't need to be in the remote repo unless you're committing the project descriptor publicly and have tested it. Remember lots of people *need* that jar to be viable. > improvement and has the added benefit of catching > problems in the HEAD versions of dependencies. As far > as Maven is concerned, betwixt, html, http, jeez, > jetty, and swing are all still in the core Jelly > library. Therefore it's quite possible that there are > as-yet undiagnosed problems in my refactoring. Why are they still there? -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog Work: http://www.multitask.com.au -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
