Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 75557 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2007 16:05:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Aug 2007 16:05:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 99798 invoked by uid 500); 25 Aug 2007 16:05:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 99724 invoked by uid 500); 25 Aug 2007 16:05:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 99715 invoked by uid 99); 25 Aug 2007 16:05:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 09:05:07 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.6 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OIMO,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [66.112.202.2] (HELO mail.devtech.com) (66.112.202.2) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:05:46 +0000 Received: from localhost. ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.devtech.com (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.1-dev) with SMTP ID 603 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:04:38 -0400 (EDT) From: "Noel J. Bergman" To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Subject: RE: [all][poll] How should nigthlies / CI work? Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:03:44 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <16d6c6200708250857r2100bee5g1d9533dab75a64c4@mail.gmail.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Importance: Normal X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Martin Cooper wrote: > > GUMP builds are deemed non-trusted, since GUMP downloads from > > non-ASF sites and includes them in builds without any vetting > > of the third party dependencies. > True, but it's not clear that everything in the public Maven repo > should be considered as "vetted" either. Exactly. Maven continues to be remiss in delivering on their goal of ensuring authenticated packages. I view anyone who uses the public Maven repository as being foolish; competent Maven users have their own private repositories. And, yes, the corollary that GUMP is building from the latest of everything is another key reason not to use it for nightly builds. --- Noel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org