I'm trying to configure to ts-tinkerpop
<https://github.com/RedSeal-co/ts-tinkerpop> to build using 3.0.0-M9-rc3
from jitpack.io and am not able to make it work. It could be that I'm
simply bumping up against a limitation in my knowledge of maven. Jitpack
claims that I should include a dependency like this:
<dependency>
<groupId>com.github.apache</groupId>
<artifactId>incubator-tinkerpop</artifactId>
<version>3.0.0.M9-incubating-rc3</version>
</dependency>
If that is the only tinkerpop related dependency, when I run maven I get
errors like this one:
[WARNING] The POM for
org.apache.tinkerpop:gremlin-core:jar:3.0.0.M9-incubating-rc3 is missing,
no dependency information available
Examining the build log, I see this:
Built artifact:
com.github.apache.incubator-tinkerpop:gremlin-core:3.0.0.M9-incubating-rc3
The groupId is listed three different ways above: `com.github.apache`,
`org.apache.tinkerpop` and `com.github.apache.incubator-tinkerpop`. It
looks to me that jitpack is not consistently mapping groupIds.
Has anyone been able to use jitpack from maven to install tinkerpop jars?
Thanks,
Jim Lloyd
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 2:56 PM Matthias Broecheler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Marko,
>
> yes, I realize that some of these are already fixed - that's why I provided
> a list of Titan issues since corresponding TP3 tickets don't exist. I just
> wanted to make an argument in favor of an M9 release.
>
> I disagree on 3). The issue here is that a vendor cannot access a described
> feature of TP3. That's an error and not a nice to have.
>
> Thanks,
> Matthias
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:54 AM Marko Rodriguez <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Matthias,
> >
> > Many of the issues below were completed in April while we were in the M8
> > hiatus. When we do the 3.0.0.M8-incubating-rc1 tag on Monday, please go
> > over these again and see where Titan is not happy.
> >
> > Next, instead of giving us Titan tickets, please create and enumerate
> > TinkerPop tickets so we are aware of them and can discuss on TinkerPop
> > JIRA. Also, note that some tickets are blockers and some are not. For
> > instance, (3) below is a "nice to have" but should not hold up releasing
> > M9. Thus, only those issues that you find are blockers for Titan should
> be
> > considered as a "we are not happy with rcX."
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time on this,
> > Marko.
> >
> > http://markorodriguez.com
> >
> >
> > > 1) Leaving the property(key,value) default up to vendors (#627):
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1060
> > >
> > > 2) Groovy test failures due to ID conversion:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1044
> > >
> > > 3) Inability to add custom profiling information:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1035
> > >
> > > 4) Vendor and TP3 strategies don't mix well:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1034
> > >
> > > 5) Errors in Performance test:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1007
> > >
> > > 6) Other groovy related failures:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1006
> > >
> > > 7) TP3 should not use graph related names in its schema (like "edge",
> > > "element", etc) so that graph vendors can have the flexibility to
> reserve
> > > those for schema management purposes:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/730
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/634
> > >
> > > 8) @BeforeClass semantics isn't fully honored by the Test suite:
> > > https://github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/issues/1061
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Matthias
> >
> >
>
