On 11-09-17 08:55 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Manfred Moser
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 23:38
To: dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: Request for review and comment
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-5167
On 11-09-17 09:00 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
Is the metadata in the revision? Only export the revision. Defense,
Healthcare, life safety, large organizations, all of these type of
organizations have rules, we are trying to make Maven more
adaptable
so it can be used there on projectes where the rules are enforced.
gap you list that repository in a<repository/> by pathname.
Then you have a forbiden delta from what is in the official record.
Or you maintain a repo manager on the secure side of the air
The repo manager was not in the official record.
gap and you publish it there.
This whole argument is totally a red herring. You will not be
able to have all artifacts in the SCM system. At least you
have to specify the tool chain to actually run the build
including operating system, java and so on.
And they are in the SCM too ... Look I am not going to argue about what
organizations should or should not do, nor do or will I care about arguments on
how it should be changed. I am here providing a patch, and asking for technical
evaluation on it. There is one simple fact here, and it is there are maven users
who require this patch. There is two possible outcomes: it gets included in some
form or it does not. If there are technical issues with the patch I will address
them. I will no longer argue "political" issues, I will call them out as
nonsense.
It is totally feasible to add a repo manager as just another
required build tool and add a backup/export of the repository
content as part of the code that you put on the dvd. You
could even just do a clean build on a fresh machine and take
a copy of the local repo. Or even create a virtual machine
image with the full setup.
It will work just fine off the grid. In fact with Maven it
will run better if you use a repo manager than without..
I have done that in the past for escrow services in the
healthcare industry fullfilling all requirements and passing
various audits for ISO and FDA approval.
The requirement you cite as part CMMI L3 and such does imho
not really exist in this strict sense of pure SCM storage.
You have to be able to do a reproducible build without
anything beyond what you supply for escrow .. but that has
nothing to do with SCM. And if you controlling the content of
your repository for build reproducability is one of the
dedicated enterprise features of e.g. Nexus Pro (and others
like Artifactory).
Cludging something into Maven itself feels wrong to me.
What part of the patch is cludgy, I would like to fix it.
The patch by itself might not be but in my feeling it goes against the
general design of Maven and might have problems associated to it in
various use cases beyond your specific example
Taking on the patch means providing documentation for it and support
into the future and around use cases others come up with together with
plugins and so on. At a minimum I would suggest to have that all done as
well as some IT tests around it.
I can see this feature being used by a lot of people coming from manual
dependency management and never actually getting the benefits of Maven
due to being stuck with this approach since that is how they started.
just my 2c though..
manfred
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
