Russell Gold wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 17:04:17 +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I kinda disagree. Eclipse 'forces' you to enter the http of the repository from which you can get a plugin, and AFAIK it has not
become (yet?) unwieldy.
Plugins are not the same as dependencies. Each user selects a plugin typically *once* as part of a manual configuation of the tool. Dependencies are selected (and considered for download) *every* time an automated build is run.
:-? Don't I write this down in a property file - pom?
Further, in an open-source world the builds are frequently run by people who are not and have no access to those who defined the builds. Downloading really needs to be easy and automatic.
This is not about downloading...
I mean, instead of:
<dependency>
<id/>
<groupId/>
<artifactId/>
<version/>
<jar/>
<type/>
<url/>
<properties>
</properties>
</dependency>Why not something like:
<dependency>
<id/>
<groupId/>
<artifactId/>
<version/>
<jar/>
<type/>
<url/>
<repository type="" url=""/>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<properties>
</properties>
</dependency>You see, directing users to repositories with diversely licensed jars, is not something that is particularly nice, as you put yourself in a position of being liable.
How so?
This is controversial, but it may be, and sun shows this in a similar way with the click-through license stuff, that some would not want to have their repo be part of a central DNS, and some users, especially in corporate environments, want to be able to direct users to different repos for different artifacts.
If we build a central "DNS", we would become possible target in case someone does not want to be listed, or, vice versa, we could not provide the repo service if someone has a repo but does not want to be listed.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
