I pushed my changes and updated master version to 1.4-SNAPSHOT
I enthusiastically support making the only fallback repository be maven
central. Can we drop the "ignore fallback repos" flag if we do this?
thanks
david jencks
On Jan 10, 2012, at 10:09 AM, Harald Wellmann wrote:
> Achim and Toni
Makes sense!
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Harald Wellmann <
hwellmann...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Achim and Toni, thanks for your comments.
>
> Am 10.01.2012 17:43, schrieb Toni Menzel:
>
>
>> But it was also the time when Maven Central was
>> not that central as it is today.
>>
>
> Maven Cen
Achim and Toni, thanks for your comments.
Am 10.01.2012 17:43, schrieb Toni Menzel:
But it was also the time when Maven Central was
not that central as it is today.
Maven Central is getting centraller and centraller :-)
Actually, it has become more Central than Maven, and it's now called The
@David: Thanks for looking into this. Highly appreciated! Welcome to OPS4J!
@Harald: Yes, the default repos came from Pax Runner being the very center
of the universe. But it was also the time when Maven Central was not that
central as it is today. At that time - around 2007/08 the big communities
Hi,
@David, +1 all other basically have said what I think about it :)
@Harald, I might shed some light about the 1.2.x line
It was introduced because Toni started to work on the aether stuff around
the 1.3 release and this
introduced some serious issues in the beginning to Karaf. That's why I
add
+1 from me (with the same alternatives selected by Andreas).
In addition, I'd like to point out (1) another problem related to
Maven repository handling in Pax URL, and I think it would be useful
(2) to clarify the meaning and purpose of the different Pax URL
release lines.
(1) I recently wrote a
Hey David,
I'm also +1 (with 1.b and 2.2.a) to all of those changes. I would consider
1.b and 2.1 rather as a bug-fix and 2.2(.a) is an optional feature (from a
user point of view); so no problem here.
Kind regards,
Andreas
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 00:13, David Jencks wrote:
> At the risk of ca
At the risk of causing total confusion, I'm going to discuss more than one
issue in this email. Please consider looking at the whole message, not just
the first problem.
1. Configuration source (PAXURL-147, KARAF-910). Karaf uses the pax mvn
(aether) url handler during initial startup, and tr
