On Friday 12 September 2008 Stephen Connolly wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Martin Höller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday 12 September 2008 Stephen Connolly wrote: > > > I know that plans for Maven 2.2 or 3.0 or some such is/was to > > > deprecate the declaration of repositories within the pom because of > > > this very problem. > > > > > > Of course banning repository declarations within poms is a swings and > > > roundabouts solution: > > > + fix this type of problem > > > - cause problems if you need something that you cannot get pushed > > > into repo1 > > > > Well, one could always declare additional repos in settings.xml. I'd > > say this is a far better place than pom.xml. > > > > Thank's Stephen for clarifying this. > > > > - martin > > Yeah but the problem with having to declare the additional repos in your > settings.xml is now the project builds for me but not for you (until you > get my settings.xml)
That's true, but usually building some project imlies reading the installation instruction anyway... at least in theory ;) On the other hand reproducablity is an important requirement. Relying on a repository which some dependency introduced doesn't really increase reproducablity. > And additionally, each repository that you add slows down the build as > Maven has to check _all_ repositories that it knows about for the > artifacts... and then if one of those is feeling slow your (normally > fast) build becomes increasingly slow. At least for companies working seriously on software projects having an internal remote repository is a must, which reduces this problem. OTOH, for OSS developers working on multiple OSS projects, this might be a bigger issue. - martin
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
