On 8 Aug 07, at 1:46 AM 8 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
I'll tell them it works ;)
No arguments that the existing artifact code leaves some to be
desired, but once it's separated, cleaned up, switch to being graph
based, and adjust the api and support classes so that different
implementations like Ivy, OSGi, and Maven are possible it will be
fine. Ultimately I see repositories being managed by applications and
that will become the norm, for required functionality and
transactionality so the storage formats won't be visible. But on the
local side what the user actually sees being entirely different
concerns me.
On 8/7/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8 Aug 07, at 12:40 AM 8 Aug 07, Shane Isbell wrote:
Some background info on the repository changes:
http://www.jroller.com/random7/entry/
apache_nmaven_repository_structure_and
I wouldn't go veering off too far from the way Java Maven works as I
won't be too keen on integrating this back into the top-level project
being entirely different then the existing system. Using an entirely
different resolution mechanism and a different local repository
format creating a dichotomy between Maven and NMaven.
What do you tell people when they are accustom to Maven and then
start using NMaven and it works completely differently?
Shane
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder and PMC Chair, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
