Thanks for clarifying. I don’t think Maven Central will allow you to publish under another group name. (For good reason; they require you to publish to a domain that you own.) Maybe org.apache.hop-plugins would be acceptable.
Julian > On Aug 16, 2022, at 12:19 PM, Hans Van Akelyen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Julian, > > Forgot to answer your question, yes we are talking only about jars that get > generated from our official release code. > Actually all those other plugins should receive a different package as they > should not be under the org.apache umbrella. > > Cheers, > Hans > > On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 at 20:46, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I haven’t heard an answer to concerns about licensing. Are we only talking >> about code in the ‘plugins’ directory? [1] Or are we also talking about >> external plugins? [2] >> >> Julian >> >> [1] https://github.com/apache/hop/tree/master/plugins < >> https://github.com/apache/hop/tree/master/plugins> >> >> [2] https://hop.apache.org/manual/latest/plugins/external-plugins.html < >> https://hop.apache.org/manual/latest/plugins/external-plugins.html> >> >>> On Aug 16, 2022, at 12:33 AM, Hans Van Akelyen < >> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I would like to thank you all for the feedback, I will start working on >>> getting artifacts to maven central. >>> As there was no real consensus in this thread we might better just go and >>> add as many artifacts as possible. >>> For people that want to include plugins in their own custom apps there >> will >>> otherwise be no easy way to fetch official released parts. >>> >>> If in the future we have a marketplace/centralised spot to fetch plugins >> we >>> can re-evaluate if all plugins need to be added to maven central. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Hans >>> >>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2022 at 01:28, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> In general I’d say publish as much as possible - we want to reduce >>>> friction for our users, and Maven Central is a great way to reduce >> friction. >>>> >>>> But acting on behalf of the ASF we have to ensure that we have the right >>>> to publish. I don’t know the details of how Hop does plugins. If the >> code >>>> has been contributed (say via a PR to https://github.com/apache/hop) >> then >>>> we’re probably good, but if the plugin code is in a non-ASF repo we are >> on >>>> shakier ground. >>>> >>>> We would be publishing packages in the org.apache.hop Maven groupId and >>>> that sets up a certain expectation to users (about copyright, license, >> IP >>>> provenance, patent licensing) that might not be accurate. >>>> >>>> Julian >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2022, at 2:05 AM, Bart Maertens <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Hans, >>>>> >>>>> Agreed, the core jars will probably be a great start. >>>>> Thanks for starting the discussion. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Bart >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 10:57 AM Matt Casters <[email protected] >>>> .invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Absolutely, let's stick to the core modules and then pick up >> additional >>>>>> requests via JIRA if there are any. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 10:49 AM Sergio Ramazzina < >> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Hans, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think that publishing the "core" artifacts is more than enough. In >> my >>>>>>> opinion, I don't foresee any need to have also the plugins artifacts >>>>>>> published >>>>>>> >>>>>>> S >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2022/08/08 14:02:04 Hans Van Akelyen wrote: >>>>>>>> Hello Hoppers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would like to start a small thread to hear about your opinions on >>>>>>> pushing >>>>>>>> our artifacts to maven central... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Currently we are releasing source code/client and docker images. As >>>>>> there >>>>>>>> are more people that are starting to develop against our codebase it >>>>>>> might >>>>>>>> also be useful to give them artifacts on maven central to use in >> their >>>>>>> POM >>>>>>>> (now they have to use snapshots or locally build our jars). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The main thing I am struggling with is which artifacts should we >>>>>> include >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> this release? >>>>>>>> Should we only publish our "core" components >> (core/engine/UI/RAP/RCP) >>>>>> or >>>>>>>> should we include all our plugins? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think we can all agree that the artifacts we make in our assembly >>>>>> phase >>>>>>>> should not be pushed (unless someone disagrees?) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would love to get your feedback to decide if we should start >> preparing >>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> for our next release. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Hans >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Neo4j Chief Solutions Architect >>>>>> *✉ *[email protected] >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
