If you really feel you need to control the source of where you download components from within the source control system I would still NOT use the repositories definition in the POM since that is them transferred to the target repo on deployment (unless you use flatten).
Instead I would check in a specific settings.xml as part of the project... or even multiple ones for different build scenarios.. Manfred KARR, DAVID wrote on 2016-10-17 14:42: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Manfred Moser [mailto:manf...@simpligility.com] >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 1:35 PM >> To: users@maven.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Comparing specifying repositories in pom vs. settings.xml? >> >> http://blog.sonatype.com/2009/02/why-putting-repositories-in-your-poms- >> is-a-bad-idea/ > > The point about open-source projects is well-taken. I would never specify > repositories in a POM for a public project. > > The section about "Enterprise" just seems odd to me. It seems very focused on > "central", when that might not be the case at all. We use many open-source > projects, but those aren't very volatile. We use dozens of internal > artifacts, > and there isn't a lot of doubt about what repos to get particular kinds of > artifacts from. I find build repeatability more important (specifying all > requirements in the build script). The requirement about "generally will want > all your developers using the same set of repositories" is pretty important to > me, but the recommended solution just seems counterproductive. Specifying it > in the POM for the project seems to be the most direct way to ensure that. > >> KARR, DAVID wrote on 2016-10-17 13:03: >> >> > One thing I run into when jumping between different projects is >> > different expectations for what maven repos I need to be using. In >> > the past, I had to have multiple copies of "~/.m2/settings.xml" lying >> > around, and I would hack the specified repos when I needed to. >> > >> > Recently, I saw a situation where the required repositories were >> > simply defined in the top-level pom for the project. If this is done >> > consistently, there's no longer any need to hack the settings.xml >> file. >> > >> > I seem to remember seeing some advice that specifying repositories in >> > the POM is a bad practice. If I'm remembering this correctly, this >> > seems odd. Forcing the correct repos to be defined in the >> > settings.xml works against "repeatable builds". >> > >> > What is the recommended advice here? >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >> > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
