>1. A locked down repo in which only "approved" versions of some deps
exist.

>2. An open repo which proxied on to maven central.

This is commonly done where the CI system uses only the approved
versions and the devs are free to use the proxied one. It simply means
that they must be sure that the dependencies are in the approved version
before they commit/merge or obviously the CI will fail (as it should)

>Note that the process of approving an artifact is not trivial - we need
to
>vet each dep and each transitive dep of said deps - don't really want
to do
>all this rigmarole in the case of test-scope and plugin deps.

This simply isn't possible at the moment. As you discovered, even the
pluginRepository separation isn't working perfectly because it tries to
find the plugin's deps in a normal repo. Further, the pluginRepository
separation is deprecated in 2.1 because it doesn't really get any
benefit and generally makes a mess of things.

You have a valid use case here, but it simply hasn't been proposed or
coded. This is something that could be done, but more likely in the 2.2
timeframe.

>Even if maven somehow communicated the scope of the artifact it is
>requesting to the repository I could work around this at the repository
>level; i.e., for e.g., the open-proxied repo would reject all requests
for
>compile/runtime dependencies and only allows requests for test and
plugin
>dependencies and their transitive dependencies, but maven swallows up
this
>information before making the call to the repository.

>Is sending this information along with the call to the repository
difficult?
>I have no idea how maven resolves dependencies so have no idea as to
how
>easy/difficult this is.

This would require a new wagon implementation to be tightly tied to a
repository manager like Nexus as the current defaults are using regular
http gets and convey no information other than the file they want.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to