Most debian packagers that don't have their apps in the default APT
sources provide a standard page somewhere on their website for adding a
new source. This would be pretty easy for third-party repository
providers to do, and would have the added benefit of making them really
think about it and support that repository as public
infrastructure...along with providing ticket/bug tracking for that
repository's reachability along with the build files or the source code
for the app itself.
Of course, there's not much reason I can think of that an OSS project
wouldn't just configure synchronization with central if they're going to
go to all this trouble...but for non-OSS I can see them using the above.
In that case, there's a chance they would want to authenticate/control
access to that repository anyway, in which case the user would need to
modify his settings.xml anyway...
-john
Jesse McConnell wrote:
The problem I see is that without being able to push up repositories
with third party artifacts that are not in central yet you still
depend on for integrations or things like that...you are out of luck
and need some mechanism of pushing that knowledge/information to the
user of the artifact...and a wiki page or a webpage detailing that is
not acceptable imo as it makes it difficult for the user as they need
to _find_ that page.
Now I would be pro notification as well, along the lines that brett
was mentioning I think
I can declare a repo in a third party integration, perhaps against a
corporate repo that has some open source component they are not
syncing to central....and that is _ignored_ in the build, ie never
consulted, but when that is detected and if the build is not able to
complete it should pump out that information to the user declaring
that other repositories have been detected and that perhaps missing
dependencies are located in there...
jesse
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 09:17, Paul Gier <pg...@redhat.com> wrote:
I really think it should not be allowed, since it makes the builds less
predictable/reproduceable/secure. Most people I've talked to think it's a
bug when they first see it happening because they are trying to figure out
why Maven is downloading files from a random location on the Internet.
The people who have a corporate policy to only download from central are
already breaking their policy whether they list the alternate repo in
settings.xml or it is added from a dependency.
With that said, I'm ok with having it configurable as Jesse suggests as long
as the default behaviour is to not add the repositories to the build.
Jesse McConnell wrote:
judging from the response I have gotten from people both wanting and
not wanting repositories declared for various integrations with jetty,
the problem folks seem to be ones where their corporate policy dictate
they can not use any repo other then central but they do not have a
repo manager setup.
since we can't rightly force people to install and maintain repository
managers, at first blush I would probably error on the side of a
option in the settings.xml a la offline
<transitiveRepositories>true/false</transtiveRepositories>
jesse
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 07:03, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
I would advocate not allowing them, but using them to provide useful
information in the case of a resolution exception that can easily guide
the
user on what to do.
If folks strongly want to continue to allow it, I would go with a
prominent
warning (which is the case for several other things now).
As to what the user is guided to do - I assume that is to declare them as
repositories in the current project, or to refer to their repository
manager's documentation to add it there (with this being recommended). In
the long run I'd hope Maven can better handle multiple repositories OOTB
(in
a way that still complements the use of a repository manager) - actually
I
remember briefly talking to Brian about that at last year's ApacheCon
Maven
BOF :) Time flies...
- Brett
On 28/10/2009, at 10:52 PM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
Hi,
following a comment by Wendy on JIRA, I wanted to re-check what our
plans
are for repositories in dependency POMs. In more detail, how is
dependency
resolution in Maven 3.x expected to work here:
project ---depends-on---> A ---depends-on---> B
where the POM of A declares the repository R hosting B.
Now, when it comes to resolve B's POM/JAR (and its transitive
dependencies) in the context of building the project, should Maven 3
also
consider R (like currently done in Maven 2) or only those repositories
that
are available for the root of the dependency graph, i.e. the
repositories
declared in the POM of the project and the settings?
Besides the question of the degree of backward-compat we want to keep,
the
issue with ignoring the repositories declared in dependency POMs I see
is
the effect on open source projects and their consumers. If one project
consumes the artifacts of another, do we want the first project to
redeclare
all repositories required to resolve the transitive dependencies of the
second project? Some arguments for the other side can be found in [1].
So, where do we want to go with this?
Benjamin
[0]
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4413?focusedCommentId=196344&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#action_196344
[1] http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3056
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
