Maczka Michal wrote on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 4:13 PM:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jörg Schaible
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:49 PM
[snip]
>> How does this help if your project relies on OSS and
>> proprietary artifacts? How can I configure Maven to look for
>> the propri
Hi Stephen
Stephen Nesbitt wrote on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:27 AM:
[snip]
>>> 2) set artifact/group to latest release of an artifact/group
>>
>> 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> Not quite. I deal with 20 odd products on an essentially monthly
> release cycle. 20 products with an average of 2 concurrent
> d
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 14:19, Brett Porter wrote:
> > Jason, you are absolutely correct - the requirement is *not*
> > separate repositories. I think the fundamental requirement is
> > the ability to classify artifacts and to select artifacts based
> > on classification.
>
> I agree with Jason
> Jason, you are absolutely correct - the requirement is *not*
> separate repositories. I think the fundamental requirement is the
> ability to classify artifacts and to select artifacts based on
> classification.
I agree with Jason that this is getting too complicated, and what I Was pushing
t
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 11:45, Brett Porter wrote:
> I'm still not sure what you need here. When you use a SNAPSHOT,
> it is not first wins, but newest - all are checked.
>
> But you talk about changing repositories per group - aren't the
> repositories paritioned enough such that the set of gr
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 13:24, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 12:17, Stephen Nesbitt wrote:
> > Not sure I follow here. Most of the time developers will work
> > against the artifacts in the QA repository.
>
> I'm watching this conversation but I'll jump in here with a
> question.
On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 12:17, Stephen Nesbitt wrote:
> Not sure I follow here. Most of the time developers will work
> against the artifacts in the QA repository.
I'm watching this conversation but I'll jump in here with a question.
Why do you need a separate repository for QA artifacts? At the
Actually I was going to have a shot at creating a patch for this, but
when I checked the CVS, I got lost with the fact that the code appears
to be generated and I havent found time yet to figure out exactly how
:-)
-Corey
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:09:06 +1100, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Hi,
Stephen Nesbitt wrote:
I think this situation is best covered by publishing to different
repositories for each, and then only utilising the remote
repositories appropriate when building. IF you happen to specify
more than one remote repository, you get the newest which should
be correct.
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 04:46, Brett Porter wrote:
Hi Brett.
You suggested I dive in so I'm going to
>
> I think this situation is best covered by publishing to different
> repositories for each, and then only utilising the remote
> repositories appropriate when building. IF you happen to sp
Stephen Nesbitt wrote:
should be visited.
I am not sure that this is fine grained enough. I can imagine a use
case in which a developer has dependecies on jar A & jar B both
having the same groupId with a repository tied to say QA snapshots.
For whatever reason the developer decides that he
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 07:23, Maczka Michal wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> I forgot to add that it would be possible to make a decsion which
> repository should be hit
> using the value provided in groupId tag of the dependency.
>
> so if it is foo/baa/xxx the repositry A and
> only
> -Original Message-
> From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:49 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
> How does this help if your project relies on OSS and
> propriet
> -Original Message-
> From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:49 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
>
> Maczka Michal wrote on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 12:00 PM:
>
Maczka Michal wrote on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 12:00 PM:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Stephen Nesbitt
[snip]
>
>> I noticed that Jörg Schaible's post kinda made the same point with
>> the suggestion of a tag in the dependency element.
>>
>> Hows does any of this fit into"in situ" a
Hi Stephen,
I think this situation is best covered by publishing to different
repositories for each, and then only utilising the remote repositories
appropriate when building. IF you happen to specify more than one remote
repository, you get the newest which should be correct.
There are two thi
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Nesbitt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 1:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Vincent Massol
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
>
> On Sunday 21 November 2004 02:14, Vincent Mass
> -Original Message-
> From: Corey Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 5:11 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
>
> While we are on the subject of adding tags to has a scope
> tag b
This has been discussed several times in the past. I must say, scope is
probably the best name I've seen for it so far.
It will get resolved in some way in the near future.
- Brett
Corey Scott wrote:
While we are on the subject of adding tags to has a scope
tag been considered? This would allow
While we are on the subject of adding tags to has a scope
tag been considered? This would allow users to generate dep reports
and so on that lead to a better understanding of where and why the
dependancy exists.
Examples:
Runtime (default) runtime
Test Only test
Build Only build
Dependancy of a
On Sunday 21 November 2004 02:14, Vincent Massol wrote:
> Hi Maven devs,
>
> I think there's a need to allow specifying when some artifacts
> are only to be looked for in the local repository. For example,
> in a multiproject the local repository is used to share private
> artifacts between the sub
Hi folks,
Vincent Massol wrote on Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:15 AM:
[snip]
> One possible solution (backward compatible) would be to add a
> true|false (defaults to false) element to the
> element.
>
> Would this be acceptable for CVS HEAD of m1? Is there
> something planned along these lines
If we can do it without extra tag it's all the best.
Thinking about it, if jar:install is used in multiproject, and no
download is attempted, this should still work as is.
I don't understand why this is linked with the reactor. Let's imagine I wish
to build one of the subprojects without rebu
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: lundi 22 novembre 2004 01:45
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
> > True. I can also run with the offline mode on. But all those are really
>
> True. I can also run with the offline mode on. But all those are really
> hacks. I was looking for a more robust solution for m1.
Let's go for a robust solution then: I don't see any reason why we can't do the
in-situ handling for m1 without extra tags.
The reactor has a list of projects: feed
> -Original Message-
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: dimanche 21 novembre 2004 20:31
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Jason and Michal. I think adding different SNAPS
Hi Michal,
> -Original Message-
> From: Michal Maczka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: lundi 22 novembre 2004 02:47
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
> Vincent Massol wrote:
>
> >Hi Maven devs,
> >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: dimanche 21 novembre 2004 15:45
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
>
> On Sun, 2004-11-21 at 05:14, Vincent Massol wrote:
> > Hi Maven devs
PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun 11/21/2004 2:14 AM
To: 'Maven Developers List'
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Ading a new tag to ?
Hi Maven devs,
I think there's a need to allow specifying when some artifacts are only to
be looked for in the local repository. For example, in a multiproject the
local reposi
Hi,
I agree with Jason and Michal. I think adding different SNAPSHOT
repositories (perhaps allowing even finer grained control over a
repository by limiting some groups internally, etc), and fixing the
speed problem cover this pretty well, so there is no need for a new tag.
To get it working to
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Maven devs,
I think there's a need to allow specifying when some artifacts are only to
be looked for in the local repository. For example, in a multiproject the
local repository is used to share private artifacts between the subprojects.
These private artifacts are not mean
On Sun, 2004-11-21 at 05:14, Vincent Massol wrote:
> Hi Maven devs,
>
>
> Would this be acceptable for CVS HEAD of m1? Is there something planned
> along these lines for m2?
Your example snippet seems to be all refering to SNAPSHOTs? Are you
looking for something SNAPSHOT in particular? I'm askin
Hi Maven devs,
I think there's a need to allow specifying when some artifacts are only to
be looked for in the local repository. For example, in a multiproject the
local repository is used to share private artifacts between the subprojects.
These private artifacts are not meant to be uploaded to a
33 matches
Mail list logo
