Re: Fw: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
On 3/14/06, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have prepared poms for all Tomcat 5.5.15 artifacts, but I have some questions. Should I open Bugzilla ticket with these questions or ask you first? I'm still not sure who is in charge of these poms. Did Geronimo just do it once for the Tomcat version they needed? Jacek? Bugzilla doesn't work very well for discussions, so I'd suggest using the Tomcat developers list if you have questions about their dependencies. I'm subscribed, but not authoritative. :) Then when you have the poms in good shape, open an enhancement ticket, attach the poms, and ask that they be placed in the Apache Maven repo so they will sync to ibiblio. Ideally Tomcat will make this part of the release process, but that may take some time to accomplish. -- Wendy
Re: Fw: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
06-03-14, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): I'm still not sure who is in charge of these poms. Did Geronimo just do it once for the Tomcat version they needed? Jacek? That's exactly how we (=Geronimo team) did it. When there was a need for these jars, Jeff or me cut and published them. We (at least me) didn't care about poms and that's why they're missing. We still don't care, but the closer we are with the migration efforts the more important it is to change it (it would be very appreciated when we could cut the number of declared dependencies in Geronimo's poms). Of course, before I did it the first time, I had asked Tomcat devs whether they would've granted us (= Geronimo team) the permission and they had aggreed (it should be somewhere in the tomcat-dev archives). Wendy Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.org.pl
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
06-03-06, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): Hi Wendy Now I have some time and I started preparing poms for all Tomcat artifacts. I have checked out all modules from svn (tags TOMCAT_5_5_15) and now I'm preparing poms for them. I already see, that I will have many questions. Where can we discuss it all? On Tomcat Bugzilla? Witaj Grzegorz, Isn't it already sorted out? See http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAVENUPLOAD-761. Greg Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.org.pl
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
- Original Message - From: Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio 06-03-06, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): Hi Wendy Now I have some time and I started preparing poms for all Tomcat artifacts. I have checked out all modules from svn (tags TOMCAT_5_5_15) and now I'm preparing poms for them. I already see, that I will have many questions. Where can we discuss it all? On Tomcat Bugzilla? Witaj Grzegorz, Isn't it already sorted out? See http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAVENUPLOAD-761. No, Brett made only commons-modeler pom and uploaded it with jar. Tomcat artifacts still wait for poms. Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
- Original Message - From: Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 4:00 PM Subject: Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio On 2/28/06, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) It would have been synced from the Apache repository, not uploaded. I'm not sure about we don't generate empty poms though. Has that changed? If there was no pom we used to get a minimal one so Maven 2 would at least work even without transitive dependencies. I can do an investigation (check out sources from svn, compare with distribution sources, compile) and generate all poms with dependencies. I can even generate sources and javadocs jars. But I don't know what is the policy. 1. Is it right to prepare pom by person which is not a product author? When generating dependencies I may omit something that is runtime only for example. For an Apache project with missing poms, I think the best thing is to convince the developers to put the files in dist/java-repository where they will sync over to ibiblio. Less work for Carlos that way. :) If you have time to create the poms and open a Bugzilla 'enhancement' ticket with Tomcat, I'll watch for it and help. -- Wendy Hi Wendy Now I have some time and I started preparing poms for all Tomcat artifacts. I have checked out all modules from svn (tags TOMCAT_5_5_15) and now I'm preparing poms for them. I already see, that I will have many questions. Where can we discuss it all? On Tomcat Bugzilla? Question #1: Where are sources for naming-factory-dbcp.jar? Greetings Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
Hi all We know there are many errors in poms on ibiblio. I would like to help to improve some of them. There are some areas I am interesting most. First Tomcat 5.5.x. I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) I placed first two issues on MEV: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-344 http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-343 I wanted someone copy empty poms from 5.5.12 to 5.5.15 changing only version. Carlos immediately closed them with Won't fix status and comment We don't generate empty poms. If you know what the dependencies are you can submit the pom. I don't understand this. There are only empty poms for all Tomcat 5.5.x artifacts. I can do an investigation (check out sources from svn, compare with distribution sources, compile) and generate all poms with dependencies. I can even generate sources and javadocs jars. But I don't know what is the policy. 1. Is it right to prepare pom by person which is not a product author? When generating dependencies I may omit something that is runtime only for example. 2. Should I generate sources and javadocs jars? 3. How can non-author say which dependencies shold be optional? There are some other products I found their poms need improvements, and I can suggest the improvements, but I would like to hear what do you thing about it all I wrote. Greg
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
On 2/28/06, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) It would have been synced from the Apache repository, not uploaded. I'm not sure about we don't generate empty poms though. Has that changed? If there was no pom we used to get a minimal one so Maven 2 would at least work even without transitive dependencies. I can do an investigation (check out sources from svn, compare with distribution sources, compile) and generate all poms with dependencies. I can even generate sources and javadocs jars. But I don't know what is the policy. 1. Is it right to prepare pom by person which is not a product author? When generating dependencies I may omit something that is runtime only for example. For an Apache project with missing poms, I think the best thing is to convince the developers to put the files in dist/java-repository where they will sync over to ibiblio. Less work for Carlos that way. :) If you have time to create the poms and open a Bugzilla 'enhancement' ticket with Tomcat, I'll watch for it and help. -- Wendy
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
06-02-28, Grzegorz Słowikowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): There are some areas I am interesting most. First Tomcat 5.5.x. I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) Witaj Grzegorz! I'm almost sure they are on iBiblio for Apache Geronimo. Since Tomcat doesn't generate them, we were given the permission to do it and as usual the time constraints didn't allow us to make it more elegant. Please let us know when they change so that we won't spend much time scratching our heads when the Geronimo build breaks. Greg Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.org.pl
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
Hi, my replies are inline. Cheers, John [snip] I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) I placed first two issues on MEV: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-344 http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-343 I wanted someone copy empty poms from 5.5.12 to 5.5.15 changing only version. Carlos immediately closed them with Won't fix status and comment We don't generate empty poms. If you know what the dependencies are you can submit the pom. I don't understand this. There are only empty poms for all Tomcat 5.5.x artifacts. Those empty POMs are likely a product of an early attempt to improve the usability of the Maven 2 repository, without having to painstakingly address the correctness. The idea was to produce something which was at least as usable as Maven 1, which doesn't support transitive dependency resolution. This empty POM construction was an automated process, and the way I understand things, it's been turned off. For MEV requests, which are meant to improve both the usability and correctness of the repository, POMs should not be empty. I can do an investigation (check out sources from svn, compare with distribution sources, compile) and generate all poms with dependencies. I can even generate sources and javadocs jars. But I don't know what is the policy. 1. Is it right to prepare pom by person which is not a product author? When generating dependencies I may omit something that is runtime only for example. I'd say that getting these POMs included for maintenance in the projects is important, but not as high a priority as maintaining the repository. The MEV project is intended to let the community help in the maintenance of the repository. To me, this means any user who's in a position to know about a project's POM should be able to submit improvements. If something turns out to be wrong, we can once again revise it. 2. Should I generate sources and javadocs jars? I would think this is an activity for the project maintainers...it's a little different than the POM metadata, IMO. Is this something you need to have available in the repository? 3. How can non-author say which dependencies shold be optional? To some extent, you can guess. If that guess is wrong, then it will be revised by someone else who finds the error. Personally, I'd hate to see the community paralyzed into using the repository as-is simply because they're worried about getting something slightly wrong, or stepping on the toes of the project dev team. Of course, if the project publishes Maven POMs, then they need to be involved in keeping that POM metadata as accurate as it can be; users of those projects are in a unique position to apply pressure for this sort of thing. ;-) However, if it's up to the Maven community to maintain a POM, then IMO slightly wrong is still mostly right, and can be improved upon all the more easily. There are some other products I found their poms need improvements, and I can suggest the improvements, but I would like to hear what do you thing about it all I wrote. We can use all the help you'd like to give. :-) Please read this guide to help in putting together MEV requests for more efficient processing: http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-maven-evangelism.html Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] Improving poms on ibiblio
John is right, we stopped not long ago creating those poms that had only minimal information. We prefer not having metadata than having that, at least you now get a warning about it and if someone fixes the pom you'll get it right away without having to delete stuff in your local repo. On 2/28/06, John Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, my replies are inline. Cheers, John [snip] I analyzed ALL Tomcat 5.5.9, 5.5.12 and 5.5.15 ibiblio artifacts. What I found is: - all 5.5.9 and 5.5.12 artifacts have empty poms - only modelVersion, groupId, artifactId and version tags, no dependencies!! - all 5.5.15 artifacts have NO poms (I cannot even find maven upload issue for Tomcat 5.5.15 to check who uploaded it) I placed first two issues on MEV: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-344 http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MEV-343 I wanted someone copy empty poms from 5.5.12 to 5.5.15 changing only version. Carlos immediately closed them with Won't fix status and comment We don't generate empty poms. If you know what the dependencies are you can submit the pom. I don't understand this. There are only empty poms for all Tomcat 5.5.x artifacts. Those empty POMs are likely a product of an early attempt to improve the usability of the Maven 2 repository, without having to painstakingly address the correctness. The idea was to produce something which was at least as usable as Maven 1, which doesn't support transitive dependency resolution. This empty POM construction was an automated process, and the way I understand things, it's been turned off. For MEV requests, which are meant to improve both the usability and correctness of the repository, POMs should not be empty. I can do an investigation (check out sources from svn, compare with distribution sources, compile) and generate all poms with dependencies. I can even generate sources and javadocs jars. But I don't know what is the policy. 1. Is it right to prepare pom by person which is not a product author? When generating dependencies I may omit something that is runtime only for example. I'd say that getting these POMs included for maintenance in the projects is important, but not as high a priority as maintaining the repository. The MEV project is intended to let the community help in the maintenance of the repository. To me, this means any user who's in a position to know about a project's POM should be able to submit improvements. If something turns out to be wrong, we can once again revise it. 2. Should I generate sources and javadocs jars? I would think this is an activity for the project maintainers...it's a little different than the POM metadata, IMO. Is this something you need to have available in the repository? 3. How can non-author say which dependencies shold be optional? To some extent, you can guess. If that guess is wrong, then it will be revised by someone else who finds the error. Personally, I'd hate to see the community paralyzed into using the repository as-is simply because they're worried about getting something slightly wrong, or stepping on the toes of the project dev team. Of course, if the project publishes Maven POMs, then they need to be involved in keeping that POM metadata as accurate as it can be; users of those projects are in a unique position to apply pressure for this sort of thing. ;-) However, if it's up to the Maven community to maintain a POM, then IMO slightly wrong is still mostly right, and can be improved upon all the more easily. There are some other products I found their poms need improvements, and I can suggest the improvements, but I would like to hear what do you thing about it all I wrote. We can use all the help you'd like to give. :-) Please read this guide to help in putting together MEV requests for more efficient processing: http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-maven-evangelism.html Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I could give you my word as a Spaniard. No good. I've known too many Spaniards. -- The Princess Bride - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
