archiva-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eshan Sudharaka <esudhar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Staging repositories (was: Re: GSoC projects?)
Date Mon, 12 Apr 2010 05:25:21 GMT
hi Brett,
i have already posted my proposal to the gsoc site.Could you please check it
and if there are any unclear parts or conflicts things please let me
inform.I saw deng has already put comment on it.

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Brett Porter <brett@apache.org> wrote:

> Any further thoughts on this? Eshan, could you perhaps summarise your
> proposal so far with the comments incorporated? Unfortunately, our wiki is
> still down which is the normal place to document the current state between
> discussions, but we can continue using the mailing list in the mean time.
>
> On 06/04/2010, at 1:36 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> >
> > On 03/04/2010, at 8:25 AM, Dan Tran wrote:
> >
> >> From a build admin perspective, this what I would like to have:
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. Create a permanent staging repository on archiva where I can
> >> release/deploy all my projects one at the time.
> >>
> >>   I can have multiple staging repos so that I can release multiple
> >> project at the same time
> >
> > I agree to them being permanent - I'd prefer to be pointing Maven at
> deploying to a staging repository, rather an automatically creating a
> temporary one, and the staging repository should be available to Maven users
> without having to change it all the time. I think they must be attached to a
> particular managed repository, though, and this needs to be easy to do - I
> wouldn't want a lot of manual work each time and I definitely wouldn't want
> to be reconfiguring Maven for different deployments.
> >
> > This makes some sense for us since the permissions are currently aligned
> to the repositories, so we can grant a merging permission.
> >
> > The tools here should be reusable for similar use cases - for example if
> a proxy connector had a staging repository, we would be able to have an
> approval process for third party artifacts that are requested.
> >
> >>
> >> 2. Once the artifacts at a staging repos, I'd like it to merge the
> >> staging repo into the official release repo. Finally wipe out the
> >> staging repo's content
> >
> > It might be worth having the option of selecting which artifacts to merge
> (with default being all), then deleting those artifacts from the staging
> repository.
> >
> > In the future, this could be made more intelligent by grouping artifacts
> automatically for merging (by using the modules, parents and dependencies
> elements to detect related artifacts that need to be moved together).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Brett
> >
> > --
> > Brett Porter
> > brett@apache.org
> > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
P.A.Eshan Sudharaka
Dept of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message