Hi What next step do you plan with this plugin?
I believe that can be usable even now for users. It is not too much work to prepare a plugin to work with maven 3.6 so we can publish it and take feedback from users. I think that early release can help users to prepare their project to be ready for maven 3.7. If you wish I will take care about this plugin. niedz., 4 paź 2020 o 15:32 Slawomir Jaranowski <s.jaranow...@gmail.com> napisał(a): > First working version is ready: > > https://github.com/apache/maven-studies/pull/2 > > I'm waiting for your opinion > > pt., 2 paź 2020 o 17:05 Slawomir Jaranowski <s.jaranow...@gmail.com> > napisał(a): > >> Targeting to maven 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT makes easier access to Transformer api. >> So one issue is need to resolve: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6992 >> >> Of course it is clear that all "uploaded" files must be signed. >> Question is - if we should use transformer api only for POM or for all? >> >> pt., 2 paź 2020 o 15:57 Robert Scholte <rfscho...@apache.org> napisał(a): >> >>> All "uploaded" files must be signed, see for instance >>> https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/maven-core/3.6.3/ >>> And don't care about older Maven versions, for now just set the >>> prerequisite for Maven to 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT in the pom. >>> >>> On 2-10-2020 14:21:02, Slawomir Jaranowski <s.jaranow...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> But on the other side, plugins must sign other artifacts associated with >>> a >>> given project. >>> >>> So in this way we have two different processes - one for pom with >>> transformation and ather for rest artifacts. >>> >>> Maybe all project artifacts should go through the transformation process >>> then we can have one way for all. >>> >>> Anyway, first we should resolve how to access Transformers from the >>> plugin. >>> And how (if we want) get comparability for old maven versions. >>> >>> >>> pt., 2 paź 2020 o 10:46 Robert Scholte napisał(a): >>> >>> > In the end a signer is just another file transformer, so we need to >>> > achieve something like this: >>> > local pom >> build/consumer pom (distribute) >> sign (distribute) >>> > The plugin must be able to register a SignFileTransformer, which should >>> > only be called during deploy. For the latter I can imagine we need to >>> > extend the API. >>> > >>> > thanks, >>> > Robert >>> > On 28-9-2020 00:35:45, Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: >>> > In order to remove reflection and possibility to call: >>> > >>> > FileTransformerManager fileTransformerManager = >>> > repositorySystemSession.getFileTransformerManager(); >>> > >>> > I must add: >>> > >>> > org.eclipse.aether.transform >>> > >>> > in: >>> > >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/0e3c7a433fc4f700cc2ae6d2c11ae39ec93cbadb/maven-core/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/extension.xml#L58 >>> > >>> > Without it I have: >>> > java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: >>> > org.eclipse.aether.transform.FileTransformerManager >>> > >>> > this change will be possible in the latest maven version, call above >>> method >>> > on older maven version will cause ClassNotFoundException >>> > >>> > adding direct dependency to maven-resolver-api (even in newer version) >>> in >>> > plugin not help, >>> > I suppose that classloader for plugin is prepare in special way >>> according >>> > to META-INF/maven/extension.xml >>> > >>> > I don't know why reflection works ... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > niedz., 27 wrz 2020 o 20:30 Robert Scholte >>> > napisał(a): >>> > >>> > > For now I would focus on making it work for Maven 3.7.0 and above. >>> > > That would remove the need for reflection right? >>> > > >>> > > If there are multiple transfomers, in the end their result should >>> all be >>> > > signed. >>> > > The reason behind this is that in the future we could upload multiple >>> > > files based on the same pom. >>> > > We should always upload a model 4.0.0 compatible version, but we >>> might >>> > > also transform the local pom to a more efficient file preferred by >>> Maven >>> > 5. >>> > > >>> > > thanks, >>> > > Robert >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On 27-9-2020 13:06:45, Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: >>> > > Ok. >>> > > I did some research and spike. >>> > > >>> > > We need access to *FileTransformerManager*, it look like this is >>> method, >>> > > which we want: >>> > > >>> > > * >>> org.eclipse.aether.RepositorySystemSession#getFileTransformerManager* >>> > > We can use it from maven 3.6 (without overwriting the version of >>> > > maven-resolver-api) ... so the plugin has a minimum maven >>> requirement for >>> > > this version. But even in 3.6 and 3.7-SNAPSHOT i have exception >>> during >>> > > execution: >>> > > >>> > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal >>> > > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-sign-plugin:1.0-SNAPSHOT:sign >>> > > (with-method-call) on project test1: Execution with-method-call of >>> goal >>> > > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-sign-plugin:1.0-SNAPSHOT:sign failed: >>> A >>> > > required class was missing while executing >>> > > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-sign-plugin:1.0-SNAPSHOT:sign: >>> > > org/eclipse/aether/transform/FileTransformerManager >>> > > >>> > > So next I try by reflection ... (now looks not good) ... but I have >>> > > expected result >>> > > >>> > > So when we must use reflection maybe this magic should be done in >>> > separate >>> > > utils like >>> > > *maven-resolver, maven-artifact-transfer *(where we have magic with >>> > > reflections) >>> > > When we prepare a method/class for transparent transformation in an >>> > > external library we can simply use it in the gpg plugin and problems >>> for >>> > > the new version of maven will be solved. >>> > > Gpg plugin already use *maven-resolver, maven-artifact-transfer* >>> > > >>> > > Of course we can continue work on the new plugin - but we need more >>> time >>> > to >>> > > develop the first production/beta version. >>> > > >>> > > Another question in about api for >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> *org.eclipse.aether.transform.FileTransformerManager#getTransformersForArtifact* >>> > > result is collection of *FileTransformer* so what should happen when >>> we >>> > > have more then one transformer. >>> > > In >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/maven-resolver/blob/master/maven-resolver-impl/src/main/java/org/eclipse/aether/internal/impl/DefaultInstaller.java#L246 >>> > > result file is overwrited by last transformer from list. >>> > > >>> > > You can look at what I did at my fork: >>> > > >>> https://github.com/slawekjaranowski/maven-studies/tree/maven-sign-plugin >>> > > >>> > > I'm waiting for a decision on what should be done next ... >>> > > >>> > > sob., 26 wrz 2020 o 11:46 Slawomir Jaranowski >>> > > napisał(a): >>> > > >>> > > > Ok, I don't want to reinvent the wheels, so >>> > > > >>> > > > How to reach handle to project artifacts list, especially project >>> pom >>> > > > after transformation in plugin code? >>> > > > >>> > > > Some plugin examples, point which component should I use to achieve >>> > this >>> > > > will be great. >>> > > > >>> > > > pt., 25 wrz 2020 o 17:05 Robert Scholte napisał(a): >>> > > > >>> > > >> There no plugin yet, but I suggest to start with a branch under >>> > > >> https://github.com/apache/maven-studies before making an >>> official new >>> > > >> repository. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Let me quote 2 points mentioned by Stephen Connolly, which we >>> still >>> > need >>> > > >> to address: >>> > > >> >>> > > >> - If we switch to bouncycastle based, we will now own the key >>> storage. >>> > > >> This is both good and bad. >>> > > >> * People who have their keys stored in gpg2 will have a “fun time” >>> > > >> extracting them... or else we will have to do the dance of >>> extracting >>> > > them >>> > > >> ourselves. >>> > > >> * If we “own” the key storage, publishing keys to a key registry >>> and >>> > > >> generating keys may become our problem from the user’s >>> perspective. >>> > > >> * One of the biggest complaints about publishing on central has >>> been >>> > > >> the difficulty of gpg signing. New users will likely thank us if >>> we >>> > > make it >>> > > >> easier. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> - PGP functionality provider security issues become our problem. >>> > Before, >>> > > >> users could independently upgrade the gpg CLI tooling to work past >>> > > security >>> > > >> issues (causing it’s own issues as CLI options changed from gpg1 >>> to >>> > > gpg2). >>> > > >> With this plugin, the pgp provider version will be baked into the >>> pom. >>> > > How >>> > > >> will users be able to assure their security team that signatures >>> have >>> > > been >>> > > >> made in the version without a security issue? >>> > > >> >>> > > >> thanks, >>> > > >> Robert >>> > > >> On 25-9-2020 15:35:01, Slawomir Jaranowski >>> > > >> wrote: >>> > > >> Hi >>> > > >> >>> > > >> On the weekend I will have some spare time, so I can do something >>> > about >>> > > it >>> > > >> .. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> My questions: >>> > > >> - are there git repository, jira project for new plugin >>> > > >> - does anybody working on it now - what is progress >>> > > >> - if you want to use Apache Common OpenGPG, I think should be >>> > refreshed >>> > > >> first - is there git repo for it >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> czw., 24 wrz 2020 o 18:57 Robert Scholte napisał(a): >>> > > >> >>> > > >> > Thanks for the offer. >>> > > >> > Signing is very delicate process, so I appreciate the extra >>> help. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > thanks, >>> > > >> > Robert >>> > > >> > On 21-9-2020 09:14:54, Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: >>> > > >> > Hi >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > I have some experience in case of verifying pgp signatures using >>> > > Bouncy >>> > > >> > Castle during work on my pgpverify-maven-plugin. >>> > > >> > So If you would, I can try to help with the sign plugin. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > Let me know if you are interested. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > niedz., 20 wrz 2020 o 20:38 Robert Scholte >>> > > >> > napisał(a): >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > > With the next release of Maven the current maven-gpg-plugin >>> will >>> > > >> become >>> > > >> > > useless. >>> > > >> > > With the build//consumer pom, the local pom will be different >>> > > >> compared to >>> > > >> > > the uploaded pom. >>> > > >> > > However, the maven-gpg-plugin now uses the pom.xml of the >>> local >>> > > >> project. >>> > > >> > > (btw, the plugin uses the gpg commandline with a bunch of >>> > arguments. >>> > > >> The >>> > > >> > > stdio is used for passing the passphrase, you cannot stream >>> the >>> > file >>> > > >> via >>> > > >> > > commandline) >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > In Maven 3.6.x changes have been made to support InputStream >>> next >>> > to >>> > > >> > File. >>> > > >> > > This way we don't have to create a backdoor of writing a >>> temporary >>> > > >> file, >>> > > >> > > which is likely to cause issues with very creative >>> > plugin/extension >>> > > >> > > writers. Instead we should do in memory signing. >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > It would make sense to introduce a new plugin, and during a >>> > > discussion >>> > > >> > > with the PMC the idea of maven-sign-plugin was proposed (a >>> much >>> > > better >>> > > >> > > alternative campared to maven-gpg2-plugin) >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > Dennis Lundberg started a POC based on Apache Common OpenGPG, >>> > > >> however, it >>> > > >> > > is still in the sandbox[1] >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > Olivier Lamy already discovered that signing doesn't work >>> with the >>> > > >> > current >>> > > >> > > Maven 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT. >>> > > >> > > Before we can even start thinking of an alpha-release, this >>> issue >>> > > >> must be >>> > > >> > > fixed, because signing is a critical step for sharing >>> artifacts. >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > I'm still struggling with MNG-6957, but in parallel a few >>> should >>> > be >>> > > >> able >>> > > >> > > implement this. >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > Anybody willing to make this work? >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > thanks, >>> > > >> > > Robert >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > [1] http://commons.apache.org/sandbox/commons-openpgp/ [ >>> > > >> > > http://commons.apache.org/sandbox/commons-openpgp/] >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > -- >>> > > >> > Sławomir Jaranowski >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> -- >>> > > >> Sławomir Jaranowski >>> > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > Sławomir Jaranowski >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Sławomir Jaranowski >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Sławomir Jaranowski >>> > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sławomir Jaranowski >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sławomir Jaranowski >> > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > -- Sławomir Jaranowski
