ok, I suppose this is a reminiscence of Maven 2: yes, in Maven 2, there was 
this limitation that caused multiple issues linked in MNG-3010
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-3010

As Robert Scholte noticed, perhaps there are still a few glitches with some 
plugins here and there, that require precise description to be fixed

It's good to have memory: now, I hope the fix for MNG-3010 is part of our 
common memory :)

Regards,

Hervé

Le mercredi 10 janvier 2018, 23:47:13 CET Fred Cooke a écrit :
> Looks like I'm just plain wrong (and happy about it). I'm not sure where
> that memory came from. Perhaps maven 2 some time ago, though it felt fresh
> in my mind. Apologies for the noise! :-(
> 
> On 11 January 2018 at 11:22, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 10 janvier 2018, 10:21:35 CET Andreas Sewe a écrit :
> > > Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> > > > notice that Central contains artifacts produced by Maven but also by
> > 
> > other
> > 
> > > > tools: I did some analysis myself and found strange things also that
> > 
> > are
> > 
> > > > clearly not produced by Maven. Scala for example produces some
> > 
> > artifacts
> > 
> > > > that I doubt could be referenced by Maven.
> > > 
> > > Yes, Maven is not the only tool that can deploy artifacts to Central --
> > > and that's a good thing.
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > > > Then: what do we call "broken"?
> > > > Something that seems "clearly" related to a typo?
> > > > Something that can't be consumed by Maven?
> > > > Something that people who produced the release (with any tooling)
> > > > won't
> > > > consume for syntactic reasons on the result? Something that they won't
> > > > consume for other reasons? (like for example because it's continuous
> > > > deployment and it's the 4th version of the day)
> > > 
> > > I wouldn't go so far to treat version=1.6.2.1 as an illegal version
> > 
> > I was not talking about a version with 4 parts: Maven 3 supports an
> > arbitrary
> > count of parts.
> > I was talking about an artifact that is released 4 times per day, because
> > it's
> > continuous delivery (I suppose): a vast majority of releases are IMHO
> > never
> > used
> > 
> > > (after all, I can image someone using legitimately using a qualifier
> > > scheme like 1.2.3-os=linux), but there are IMHO two cases which I always
> > > consider broken:
> > > 
> > > - Spaces in any of the components of a GAV
> > > - A colon in any of the components of a GAV
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > > Spaces are just likely to cause trouble for some tool further down the
> > 
> > line.
> > 
> > > And for colons we know that they will cause trouble, being the default
> > > separator for GAVs when written as a single string.
> > > 
> > > Aside from those characters, I would probably just ban a few characters
> > > (non-printable control characters). A bit similar to what XML did with a
> > > its NCName (non-colon name) production [1].
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > > However, for groudId and artifactId we already have much stricter rules
> > > (A-Z, a-z, 0-9, ., -, _), so the argument can be made that
> > > versions/classifiers/extensions should also be made up of a more limited
> > > character set as well.
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > > In particular, care should to be taken that the path component can still
> > > be parsed unambiguously, so allowing '.' in a classifier is probably
> > > asking for trouble.
> > 
> > +1 again
> > 
> > > > And what can we do?
> > > > On the past artifacts, removing anything is not really an option:
> > > > IMHO,
> > > > the
> > > > issue does not deserve the effort and to break our base rule about
> > > > inalterability.
> > > > On the future, perhaps we can do something:
> > > > - at Maven level, sure we can and we should improve controls as much
> > > > as
> > > > possible
> > > 
> > > Yes, if only that at this level we can provide the best error messages,
> > > as the error is recognized closest to the user.
> > > 
> > > > - on other build tools: perhaps we should try not only to implement
> > 
> > checks
> > 
> > > > in Maven but also document rules for other tools to implement same
> > 
> > rules
> > 
> > > The Maven Resolver is a great place to enforce some rules in
> > > DefaultArtifact (or whatever replaces it). Granted, not everyone deploys
> > > using the Maven Resolver, but its *the* place that knows about all the
> > > intricacies of the repository layout already.
> > > 
> > > > - on repo managers used by the publishers: same rules documentation
> > > > prerequisite, but other tools target
> > > 
> > > Well, Nexus already has some checks in place, to avoid versions like
> > > "1/../../other-artifact/2". However, groupIds like "org...example" are
> > > still accepted (deployed under org/example).
> > 
> > probably ".." should be forbidden also
> > 
> > > > - on sync to central: this is the only location where some rules can
> > > > be
> > > > checked for absolutely any new artifact then really interesting at a
> > 
> > first
> > 
> > > > glance. But making rules evolve at this level is really hard since
> > 
> > there
> > 
> > > > is no real feedback process I know of when base Central publication
> > 
> > rules
> > 
> > > > are not met. Base Central publication rules were defined from the
> > > > beginning (signature, ...), then are implemented by publishers' repo
> > > > managers. I suppose failed controls done by sync to central (then sync
> > > > blocked) are rare: I'm not sure there is a strong process/tooling. And
> > > > adding it would cost some management: not easy. IMHO, we should start
> > 
> > by
> > 
> > > > first detecting if there are really issues on new artifacts these days
> > > > before trying to take actions at this level.
> > > 
> > > That being said, I think the first step is to document the syntax for
> > > GAVs somewhere (e.g., at [2] or [3]).
> > 
> > +1
> > there is an edit button near the title to find the source and propose a PR
> > 
> > :)
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Hervé
> > 
> > > Best wishes,
> > > 
> > > Andreas
> > > 
> > > [1] <https://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#NT-NCName>
> > > [2] <http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Maven_Coordinates>
> > > [3] <http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.5.2/maven-model/maven.html>
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to