Does the comment "If you are exposing your source and want to make it easy for others to build, then consider adding a repository entry to your POM, but don’t pick a URL lightly, think long-term, and use a URL that will always be under your control."
not agree with what the other guys have been saying? Chris. 2012/4/5 Arnaud Héritier <aherit...@gmail.com> > It was detailled here : > http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/02/why-putting-repositories-in-your-poms-is-a-bad-idea/ > > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Chris van Es <cva...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't see anything wrong with specifying a repo which is under >> developers control in the parent pom. It's a feature of maven and I use >> this feature regularly within my workplace to force our builds to use a >> repository manager for all dependencies and keep everything internal. I >> don't know Jenkins well enough but it might prove useful in future to limit >> the versions of core dependencies available to plugins. >> >> Chris. >> >> >> On 5 April 2012 17:43, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <kkawagu...@cloudbees.com>wrote: >> >>> On 04/05/2012 06:03 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote: >>> >>>> As Nicolas wrote, repo.jenkins-ci.org <http://repo.jenkins-ci.org> >>>> >>>> is our domain that we control, so the same thing won't happen again. >>>> >>>> (There is a separate effort to make more of our artifacts available >>>> in central, which would eliminate this problem in a long run, but we >>>> shouldn't wait for that.) >>>> >>>> >>>> Why not just hurry that effort along ;-) >>>> >>> >>> Are you volunteering? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Kohsuke Kawaguchi | CloudBees, Inc. | http://cloudbees.com/ >>> Try Nectar, our professional version of Jenkins >>> >> >> > > > -- > ----- > Arnaud Héritier > 06-89-76-64-24 > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > >
