Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-06-08 Thread Manik Surtani
What was the fix around this?  To remove the hard-coded repo in the poms?

On 31 May 2011, at 09:46, Galder Zamarreño wrote:

 I'm fine with it. I think Adrian added it but clearly, all jars should be 
 available in the Nexus maven profile.
 
 This has been fixed and integrated and build looks fine.
 
 On May 26, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
 
 So this got quite urgent right now:
 
 http://repository.jboss.org/maven2
 
 is now returning not authorized, we all knew it was deprecated since
 long time, but now it's gone and this is affecting my build and
 blocking my work.
 
 Even if I fix it locally, it's still troublesome as people depending
 on these poms will download it, get it in their cache, and then spend
 hours to figure out what's wrong, because right now Maven3 is not even
 being explicit on what is broken (I had to use -X and read the full
 log to figure this out).
 
 My current workaround is to define mirrors in my own settings.xml.
 
 Seems to me a good reason to remove all these references, or at least
 fix the links;
 I'm voting to remove them, but have no strong feeling about it as
 Pete's objections are interesting as well; just that I don't think we
 risk loosing good contributors or users, we might loose someone which
 doesn't have a clue on how Maven works, but if they're good and
 interested they'll find the wiki or ask for help; most people I know
 don't need to add this as if you use artifactory or nexus the
 jboss.org repository is already proxies by default, and others might
 have the URL setup already because they used JBoss community projects
 too.
 
 Either way, we should take a decision urgently.
 
 https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1142
 
 Cheers,
 Sanne
 
 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 11:40, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
 
 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does make 
 getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean system with 
 no changes.
 
 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed 
 that a while back and now don't discourage it.
 
 Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
 about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
 Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.
 
 Yes, and note that i'm certainly not advocating putting any old repo in a 
 pom. As Tristan says, we should require that everything is in the jboss 
 repo. I'm simply proposing putting the jboss repo in the POM as it is our 
 canonical repo.
 
 I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
 synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
 repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.
 
 Agreed, but see my other email, having them in settings.xml is just as 
 bad/worse at this point.
 
 
 I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
 their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
 anyway.
 
 I would hope we are planning to attract some new users ;-)
 
 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:
 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
 
 Hi all,
 
 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories 
 in the pom.xml files?
 
 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This 
 was added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:
 
repository
   idjboss/id
   urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
/repository
 
 First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even be 
 amongst the configured repositories.
 
 Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss Maven 
 repo in their settings.xml - 
 http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users
 
 I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even 
 as a bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the 
 JBoss repo either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.
 
 Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain 
 modules' poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but 
 is generally discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a 
 repo which contains some Spring 3.1 milestone artefacts,  and 
 cachestore-cloud points to a repo with JClouds milestones/snapshots.
 
 
 --
 Manik Surtani
 ma...@jboss.org
 twitter.com/maniksurtani
 
 Lead, Infinispan
 http://www.infinispan.org
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
 
 --
 Galder Zamarreño
 Sr. Software Engineer
 Infinispan, JBoss Cache
 
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

--
Manik Surtani
ma...@jboss.org
twitter.com/maniksurtani

Lead, 

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-06-08 Thread Sanne Grinovero
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:

 What was the fix around this?  To remove the hard-coded repo in the poms?

No, I removed the old deprecated repository.jboss.org/maven2 as this
was offline and pretty urgent, and re-adapted the build to be able to
build without it (needed to add/reconfigure other repository
definitions, especially for the scala compiler).
Now the repository is back online so the patch would not have been
that urgent, but it's good that we don't depend on the deprecated one
any more.

I still wonder if we should not remove all repository references, but
as we didn't find an agreement on that I didn't change it for the time
being.

Sanne



 On 31 May 2011, at 09:46, Galder Zamarreño wrote:

  I'm fine with it. I think Adrian added it but clearly, all jars should be 
  available in the Nexus maven profile.
 
  This has been fixed and integrated and build looks fine.
 
  On May 26, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
 
  So this got quite urgent right now:
 
  http://repository.jboss.org/maven2
 
  is now returning not authorized, we all knew it was deprecated since
  long time, but now it's gone and this is affecting my build and
  blocking my work.
 
  Even if I fix it locally, it's still troublesome as people depending
  on these poms will download it, get it in their cache, and then spend
  hours to figure out what's wrong, because right now Maven3 is not even
  being explicit on what is broken (I had to use -X and read the full
  log to figure this out).
 
  My current workaround is to define mirrors in my own settings.xml.
 
  Seems to me a good reason to remove all these references, or at least
  fix the links;
  I'm voting to remove them, but have no strong feeling about it as
  Pete's objections are interesting as well; just that I don't think we
  risk loosing good contributors or users, we might loose someone which
  doesn't have a clue on how Maven works, but if they're good and
  interested they'll find the wiki or ask for help; most people I know
  don't need to add this as if you use artifactory or nexus the
  jboss.org repository is already proxies by default, and others might
  have the URL setup already because they used JBoss community projects
  too.
 
  Either way, we should take a decision urgently.
 
  https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1142
 
  Cheers,
  Sanne
 
  2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 
  On 19 May 2011, at 11:40, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
 
  2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
  The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does 
  make getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean 
  system with no changes.
 
  Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they 
  changed that a while back and now don't discourage it.
 
  Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
  about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
  Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.
 
  Yes, and note that i'm certainly not advocating putting any old repo in a 
  pom. As Tristan says, we should require that everything is in the jboss 
  repo. I'm simply proposing putting the jboss repo in the POM as it is our 
  canonical repo.
 
  I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
  synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
  repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.
 
  Agreed, but see my other email, having them in settings.xml is just as 
  bad/worse at this point.
 
 
  I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
  their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
  anyway.
 
  I would hope we are planning to attract some new users ;-)
 
 
 
  On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:
 
 
  On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
 
  Hi all,
 
  So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories 
  in the pom.xml files?
 
  Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This 
  was added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:
 
     repository
        idjboss/id
        urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
     /repository
 
  First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even 
  be amongst the configured repositories.
 
  Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss 
  Maven repo in their settings.xml - 
  http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users
 
  I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even 
  as a bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the 
  JBoss repo either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.
 
  Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain 
  modules' poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but 
  is generally discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a 
  repo which contains some 

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-06-08 Thread Manik Surtani

On 8 Jun 2011, at 13:54, Sanne Grinovero wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com wrote:
 
 
 This may be old news, but if something is missing from the new (ish ;-) 
 r.j.o, but available in another repo, you can email Paul Gier and ask for 
 that repo to be added to the r.j.o consolidated repo.
 
 Se we could collect all needed dependencies and add them to jboss.org,
 so that nothing else is needed?

Yes, I believe so.  This should be the correct approach.  

Let me look into this.

Cheers
Manik
--
Manik Surtani
ma...@jboss.org
twitter.com/maniksurtani

Lead, Infinispan
http://www.infinispan.org



___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-31 Thread Galder Zamarreño
I'm fine with it. I think Adrian added it but clearly, all jars should be 
available in the Nexus maven profile.

This has been fixed and integrated and build looks fine.

On May 26, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:

 So this got quite urgent right now:
 
 http://repository.jboss.org/maven2
 
 is now returning not authorized, we all knew it was deprecated since
 long time, but now it's gone and this is affecting my build and
 blocking my work.
 
 Even if I fix it locally, it's still troublesome as people depending
 on these poms will download it, get it in their cache, and then spend
 hours to figure out what's wrong, because right now Maven3 is not even
 being explicit on what is broken (I had to use -X and read the full
 log to figure this out).
 
 My current workaround is to define mirrors in my own settings.xml.
 
 Seems to me a good reason to remove all these references, or at least
 fix the links;
 I'm voting to remove them, but have no strong feeling about it as
 Pete's objections are interesting as well; just that I don't think we
 risk loosing good contributors or users, we might loose someone which
 doesn't have a clue on how Maven works, but if they're good and
 interested they'll find the wiki or ask for help; most people I know
 don't need to add this as if you use artifactory or nexus the
 jboss.org repository is already proxies by default, and others might
 have the URL setup already because they used JBoss community projects
 too.
 
 Either way, we should take a decision urgently.
 
 https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1142
 
 Cheers,
 Sanne
 
 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 11:40, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
 
 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does make 
 getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean system with 
 no changes.
 
 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed 
 that a while back and now don't discourage it.
 
 Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
 about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
 Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.
 
 Yes, and note that i'm certainly not advocating putting any old repo in a 
 pom. As Tristan says, we should require that everything is in the jboss 
 repo. I'm simply proposing putting the jboss repo in the POM as it is our 
 canonical repo.
 
 I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
 synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
 repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.
 
 Agreed, but see my other email, having them in settings.xml is just as 
 bad/worse at this point.
 
 
 I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
 their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
 anyway.
 
 I would hope we are planning to attract some new users ;-)
 
 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:
 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
 
 Hi all,
 
 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories in 
 the pom.xml files?
 
 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This 
 was added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:
 
 repository
idjboss/id
urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
 /repository
 
 First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even be 
 amongst the configured repositories.
 
 Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss Maven 
 repo in their settings.xml - 
 http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users
 
 I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even as 
 a bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the JBoss 
 repo either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.
 
 Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain modules' 
 poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but is 
 generally discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a repo 
 which contains some Spring 3.1 milestone artefacts,  and cachestore-cloud 
 points to a repo with JClouds milestones/snapshots.
 
 
 --
 Manik Surtani
 ma...@jboss.org
 twitter.com/maniksurtani
 
 Lead, Infinispan
 http://www.infinispan.org
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

--
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache


___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
So this got quite urgent right now:

http://repository.jboss.org/maven2

is now returning not authorized, we all knew it was deprecated since
long time, but now it's gone and this is affecting my build and
blocking my work.

Even if I fix it locally, it's still troublesome as people depending
on these poms will download it, get it in their cache, and then spend
hours to figure out what's wrong, because right now Maven3 is not even
being explicit on what is broken (I had to use -X and read the full
log to figure this out).

My current workaround is to define mirrors in my own settings.xml.

Seems to me a good reason to remove all these references, or at least
fix the links;
I'm voting to remove them, but have no strong feeling about it as
Pete's objections are interesting as well; just that I don't think we
risk loosing good contributors or users, we might loose someone which
doesn't have a clue on how Maven works, but if they're good and
interested they'll find the wiki or ask for help; most people I know
don't need to add this as if you use artifactory or nexus the
jboss.org repository is already proxies by default, and others might
have the URL setup already because they used JBoss community projects
too.

Either way, we should take a decision urgently.

https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1142

Cheers,
Sanne

2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:

 On 19 May 2011, at 11:40, Sanne Grinovero wrote:

 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does make 
 getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean system with 
 no changes.

 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed 
 that a while back and now don't discourage it.

 Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
 about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
 Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.

 Yes, and note that i'm certainly not advocating putting any old repo in a 
 pom. As Tristan says, we should require that everything is in the jboss repo. 
 I'm simply proposing putting the jboss repo in the POM as it is our 
 canonical repo.

 I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
 synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
 repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.

 Agreed, but see my other email, having them in settings.xml is just as 
 bad/worse at this point.


 I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
 their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
 anyway.

 I would hope we are planning to attract some new users ;-)



 On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:


 On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:

 Hi all,

 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories in 
 the pom.xml files?

 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This was 
 added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:

     repository
        idjboss/id
        urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
     /repository

 First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even be 
 amongst the configured repositories.

 Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss Maven 
 repo in their settings.xml - 
 http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users

 I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even as 
 a bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the JBoss 
 repo either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.

 Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain modules' 
 poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but is generally 
 discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a repo which 
 contains some Spring 3.1 milestone artefacts,  and cachestore-cloud points 
 to a repo with JClouds milestones/snapshots.


 --
 Manik Surtani
 ma...@jboss.org
 twitter.com/maniksurtani

 Lead, Infinispan
 http://www.infinispan.org

___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Tristan Tarrant
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:52, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories in the 
 pom.xml files?

 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This was 
 added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:

I'm fine with having the JBoss repo in there, but nothing else.
Regarding 3rd party jars, there is really no excuse for these not
being on Maven Central or proxied by JBoss's repo. I for one, have put
my cassandra artifacts on Central via the Sonatype OSS repo: it's dead
simple and everyone is happier for it.

Tristan

___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Tristan Tarrant
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:18, Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com wrote:
 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed that 
 a while back and now don't discourage it.

Don't know about that, but if you want something in Maven Central, it
cannot depend on external repos. You can refer to external artifacts,
but it's up to the user to add them to their own settings.xml / repo.

Tristan
___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Sanne Grinovero
2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does make 
 getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean system with no 
 changes.

 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed that 
 a while back and now don't discourage it.

Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.
I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.

I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
anyway.


 On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:


 On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:

 Hi all,

 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories in 
 the pom.xml files?

 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This was 
 added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:

     repository
        idjboss/id
        urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
     /repository

 First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even be 
 amongst the configured repositories.

 Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss Maven 
 repo in their settings.xml - 
 http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users

 I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even as a 
 bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the JBoss repo 
 either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.

 Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain modules' 
 poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but is generally 
 discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a repo which contains 
 some Spring 3.1 milestone artefacts,  and cachestore-cloud points to a repo 
 with JClouds milestones/snapshots.


 --
 Manik Surtani
 ma...@jboss.org
 twitter.com/maniksurtani

 Lead, Infinispan
 http://www.infinispan.org




 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Pete Muir

On 19 May 2011, at 11:39, Tristan Tarrant wrote:

 On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:18, Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com wrote:
 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed 
 that a while back and now don't discourage it.
 
 Don't know about that, but if you want something in Maven Central, it
 cannot depend on external repos. You can refer to external artifacts,
 but it's up to the user to add them to their own settings.xml / repo.

This was originally a requirement for pushing to central, but they changed it 
to allow you to refer to external repos in your POM a while back (unless they 
changed it back again?).


___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Pete Muir

On 19 May 2011, at 11:47, Tristan Tarrant wrote:

 On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:40, Sanne Grinovero
 sanne.grinov...@gmail.com wrote:
 I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
 synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
 repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.
 
 For reference, here are the Sonatype OSS repository guidelines:
 
 https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide#SonatypeOSSMavenRepositoryUsageGuide-6.CentralSyncRequirement
 
 The important excerpt
 
 Besides, we discourage putting release repository/pluginRepository in
 your POM. In ideal conditions, all your dependencies should be already
 in central and central repository is self-contained. Otherwise
 people's build might break because of missing dependencies.

BTW this is the absolutely key point - that *all dependencies* must be 
transitively available from the POM. So whether an external repo is in the POM 
or in settings.xml really makes no difference when we are talking about getting 
an artifact into central. The question is simply about utility right now.
___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


Re: [infinispan-dev] Old JBoss repo in pom.xml

2011-05-19 Thread Pete Muir

On 19 May 2011, at 11:40, Sanne Grinovero wrote:

 2011/5/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com:
 The one argument for putting the (new) repo in the pom is that does make 
 getting started contributing easier, and buildable on a clean system with no 
 changes.
 
 Maven guys used to recommend not putting repos in poms, but they changed 
 that a while back and now don't discourage it.
 
 Still I've been consulting in some big companies where there are rules
 about it: projects having poms defining a repository can not be used.
 Makes it too hard to create a controlled build environment.

Yes, and note that i'm certainly not advocating putting any old repo in a pom. 
As Tristan says, we should require that everything is in the jboss repo. I'm 
simply proposing putting the jboss repo in the POM as it is our canonical 
repo.

 I also assume that at some point we might want to have our artifacts
 synched with central, I doubt they will accept poms pointing to other
 repositories, that was not the case before but it might have changed.

Agreed, but see my other email, having them in settings.xml is just as 
bad/worse at this point.

 
 I'd avoid that. people using our artifacts learned how to configure
 their settings already, or wouldn't be able to build infinispan core
 anyway.

I would hope we are planning to attract some new users ;-)

 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 10:58, Manik Surtani wrote:
 
 
 On 19 May 2011, at 09:52, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
 
 Hi all,
 
 So, what's our current approach towards hardcoding maven repositories in 
 the pom.xml files?
 
 Should we allow JBoss repos to be defined master/parent/pom.xml? This was 
 added by Adrian C when he upgraded JClouds:
 
 repository
idjboss/id
urlhttp://repository.jboss.org/maven2/url
 /repository
 
 First of all, this is a deprecated repo and not sure it should even be 
 amongst the configured repositories.
 
 Secondly, the idea so far has been that users configure the JBoss Maven 
 repo in their settings.xml - 
 http://community.jboss.org/wiki/MavenGettingStarted-Users
 
 I think we should still stick to putting it in settings.xml since even as a 
 bootstrap for project X to reach infinispan jars, you'd need the JBoss repo 
 either in project X's pom or in settings.xml.
 
 Now in some cases I've seen third-party repos exposed in certain modules' 
 poms.  This needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, but is generally 
 discouraged.  For example, infinispan-spring declares a repo which contains 
 some Spring 3.1 milestone artefacts,  and cachestore-cloud points to a repo 
 with JClouds milestones/snapshots.
 
 
 --
 Manik Surtani
 ma...@jboss.org
 twitter.com/maniksurtani
 
 Lead, Infinispan
 http://www.infinispan.org
 
 
 
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
 
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
 
 
 ___
 infinispan-dev mailing list
 infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev


___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev