Hi all,
Wondering, though not strictly 4.0.0 restricted, shouldn't a decision be
made about that vocabulary and reflect this in the docs and settings.xml
tags and so on?
I mean, I myself often explain it's not really a local repo, more a cache,
but the tag names and the docs makes it hard to spre
currently works as both a cache or artifacts from
remote repositories and as a repository of locally installed artifacts.
Do you suggest we get rid of "locally installed" functionality (which I
personally very much in favour) or you want to just change the name
(which I think will be confusing)?
I also think that installing locally is somehow to be seen as a hack. And
though I do it myself on a regular basis while developing, I indeed never
see it as a sustainable place for my artifacts, only deploy is (and still
temporary for non releases).
Yes, I think we should rename that tag.
And if
I don't understand the issue. I regularly use artifacts in my build that are
only present in my local repository. Yes, Maven checks my remote repository
for these artifacts but it doesn't ignore them if they are not in the remote
repo. It also works when building offline without access to my
ROBERT PATRICK wrote:
> I don't understand the issue. I regularly use artifacts in my build that
> are only present in my local repository. Yes, Maven checks my remote
> repository for these artifacts but it doesn't ignore them if they are not
> in the remote repo. It also works when building o
My problem with current behaviour is that the same location is used as
both cache for remote artifacts and repository for locally installed
artifacts. I think a cleaner model is to separate the two. It will still
be possible to install locally, although I am not sure we'll need
separate "install"
Am Thu, 17 Apr 2014 07:43:13 -0400
schrieb Igor Fedorenko :
> My problem with current behaviour is that the same location is used as
> both cache for remote artifacts and repository for locally installed
> artifacts.
Actually I agree, it would be good to have a "real" cache which is 1:1
existing
Am Thu, 17 Apr 2014 13:40:38 +0200
schrieb Jörg Schaible :
> > Clearly, removing the ability to install artifacts locally would be
> > a very bad idea since it would make it more difficult for casual
> > users to use Maven for casual builds (e.g., I regularly use it to
> > build sample projects for
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> My problem with current behaviour is that the same location is used as
> both cache for remote artifacts and repository for locally installed
> artifacts. I think a cleaner model is to separate the two. It will still
> be possible to instal
