Hi,
I didn't want to pin the assembly plugin vote to this, but it seemed
like a good opportunity to bring this up.
I'd like to propose we split the stable repository from the unstable
repository (which would be where alphas, betas and rcs get deployed),
and make this a documented best practice.
This would not be a concept change in Maven (at least, yet - it could
be something to consider in the versioning in future): it's simply
two types of release repositories. The stable one would be included
in Maven by default, the unstable/pre-release one would not. You'd
have to add the repository to your project.
I would suggest this for future additions to central, but leave
anything currently there in place for backwards compat.
I think this is a good all round concept, but there is a particular
practical problem that we should do this for: unpinned plugin
versions. In the specific example of the assembly plugin - if you
don't request a version (ie, use latest release), or you said [2.1,),
then you'll get the 2.2-beta-1 release which is presumably less
stable than 2.1. The same rationalisation would apply to ranges used
in any dependency, but thats the biggest use case I can think of that
affects people today. It would allow us to do more regular test
releases of the plugins.
Thoughts?
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
