Hiram Chirino wrote:
> As I see it, it comes down to a choice of having the user configure
> his pom with either
> 1) an artifact id or group id or version id that
> includes "incubator" in it.
> or
> 2) a repository id that include "incubator" in it.
Or, as I see it, both. Since the artifacts are not captive to the
repository, they should carry their own label, too.
This is not a hardship for projects. As you note, #1 is what projects
already do today, and once you've setup the build script properly, it is a
done deal. And, yes, consistency in placement would be nice. We'll try to
help that out with some project templates for Maven and Ant.
The idea that having a separate Incubator repository could reduce work
because "when the podling needs to graduate since dependent projects would
not need to change artifact ids" is not necessarily a good thing.
Distinguishing between what was put out during Incubation and what was put
out post-Incubation is a good thing.
As I see it, we might have three repositories: ASF artifacts, non-ASF
dependents (i.e., only those dependents that are vetted and used by ASF
projects, and whose license is suitable), and Apache Incubator artifacts.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
