[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7001?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17220265#comment-17220265 ]
Michael Osipov commented on MNG-7001: ------------------------------------- [~cstamas], looking at the problems now, you argree with your 100%. > Reconsider seemingly useless check of artifacts' source repository introduced > in Maven 3.0 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: MNG-7001 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7001 > Project: Maven > Issue Type: Improvement > Affects Versions: 3.0, 3.1.1, 3.2.5, 3.3.9, 3.5.4, 3.6.3 > Reporter: Petr Bodnar > Priority: Major > > This problem of "by-nobody-really-requested check for artifacts' source > repository" (just "repo-check" further on) is actually considered a bug by > many Maven users. It was introduced back in Maven 3.0, 10 years ago \(!). The > repo-check and its _practical_ disadvantages have been already thoroughly > described for example in my blog > [here|https://programmedbycoincidence.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-biggest-wtf-new-feature-ive-ever.html] > and discussed here within Jira: MNG-5181, MNG-5185, MNG-5289 and MNG-5883. > *TL;DR What is requested in this issue:* > # Remove the repo-check altogether. > # If that's not possible, make the repo-check disabled by-default and have an > option to enable it for those who need it for whatever reason. > # If even that is not possible, alter Maven and its warnings and errors so > that they do not confuse users. > # Reason about the need for the repo-check, document the reasons. > ---- > The repo-check can be _somewhat_ avoided by passing the {{-llr}} option to > Maven. AFAIK though, e. g. Eclipse's embedded Maven used for dependency > resolution doesn't support this option. Another long-outstanding issue is > that using the {{-llr}} option generates this warning on Maven build: > {noformat} > [WARNING] Disabling enhanced local repository: using legacy is strongly > discouraged to ensure build reproducibility. > {noformat} > Generally it might make sense (possibly because of activating some quite > another old part of Maven that, apart from other things, doesn't mark down > the artifacts' sources to "\*.repositories" files?). But when users have _no > other option_ that could be used for making their build reproducible by > skipping the repo-check, then the warning doesn't make sense to them. The > only other choice they have is to remove all those "\*.repositories" files > from their local Maven repository in order to make their builds work again. > Another mind-blowing issue is described in MNG-5185: If an already-downloaded > artifact doesn't go through the hard-coded repo-check, Maven just tells the > user "the artifact could not be resolved". _But you'll get the very same > message when downloading an artifact really fails._ So unless you dig in, > these two totally different situations are not distinguishable from each > other. > ---- > Yet to date, no action was taken by Maven authors to help with any of the > problems. There is also no really good (read "making-sense-in-real-life") > explanation of real pros of the introduced repo-check, that would out-weight > its cons, other than for example: > {quote}The artifacts have an identity. It matters where the artifacts were > downloaded from. Artifact A downloaded from X is not the same thing to Maven > 3 as A downloaded from Y. This can happen when you flip your settings.xml to > go from using a repository manager to using Maven Central directly for > example. > {quote} > (taken from MNG-5289 comment) > The logical question here is, to whom concretely "it matters"? Please, give > examples of what could go wrong if one has downloaded a released version of > an artifact and now its source repository changes or becomes unavailable. > Please note that we shouldn't consider the very improbable case of artifacts > downloaded from various repositories would have different content even though > having the very same GAV. The Maven's local repository filesystem structure > is not able to cope with that situation anyway, or is it? > Finally, there is also a performance-wise con of the repo-check - Maven needs > to contact the source repository every time it builds a project referencing > the checked artifact as one of its dependencies. Or doesn't it? -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)