On Mar 31, 2005, at 4:15 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

On Mar 31, 2005, at 12:54 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

- include a license file for each third-party artifact we have

This is a normal feature of a Maven repo. We should also require that an appropriate POM is installed so that contributors can be identified.

This will be a problem for ant based projects. I propose we have a minimal pom we use for these types of projects.

Y


- include a INFO file for each third-party artifact containing
    - source of jar
    - source's statement about redistribution

We should also include INFO for each release identifying the third-party jars that it uses. This means there is an easier place to look than the content of a distribution.

Can't we use the pom dependencies section for this, or are you thinking of something else?

As long as it's easy and obvious to to a browser who doen't grok maven...



Contents
--------
- top-level index page clearly describing purpose and intent of repository (0)
- all third-party dependencies needed by current and recent-in-time build (1)
- snapshot versions of Geronimo build artifacts for "sister" projects like OpenEJB that have a [soon-to-go-away] tight dependency on core geronimo code
- release versions of Geronimo build artifacts (maybe not..)
(0) can we add a short note put into our maven output that says "Geronimmo 3rd party dependencies will be sourced from the project-specific geronimo repository" or such?
(1) Do we want to keep old stuff? I think not - I think we'd want to be good ASF citizens to keep disk space usage to what is really needed. If you need an older version, for some reason, you can slog it out of ibiblio or the original source.

I think we should keep as much history as possible, at least the dependencies for all maintained branches.

I would say, we never remove a jar. A SNAPSHOT jar should just be a simlink to a numbered jar (this is what maven does already).

Re the snapshots, doesn't that result in piles of useless crap? I mean, why keep the old numbered jars around? The build conditions for them are variable at best, and I can't think of situations where you'd need to go and use an old one. ?



Actually, the only SNAPSHOTs I think we should have in our repo are for OpenEJB because of the overhead that would be involved in using versioned releases. Once we clean up the interfaces between Geronimo and OpenEJB, I think we should switch to fully versioned jars (this is what happened with activeMQ once we got the interfaces cleaned up).

I thought we also might have geronimo snapshots, because then non-geronimo openejb developers (if there are such that are active ;) could build openejb w/o having to have HEAD of G locally and built... That's the only reason I can think of (and it applies to any project that wants to tie closely to us...)


geir


-dain


--
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to