Not entirely sure I agree with this point. Another level of complexity to get round this issue?

surely if folk have any problems they can use dependencyManagement and pluginManagement to solve
the same issue?
I know plenty of folk who barely know why to separate snapshot from release repositories, I think adding another split will just raise the bar of easy adoption...

Andy

On 29 Mar 2007, at 00:46, Brett Porter wrote:

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]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to