commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Confused about maven artifact groupIds
Date Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:28:34 GMT
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Niall Pemberton
<niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:05 PM, Dennis Lundberg <dennisl@apache.org> wrote:
>> Rahul Akolkar wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Niall Pemberton
>>> <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Niall Pemberton
>>>>> <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <snip/>
>>>>>> Commons IO 1.3.2 was a mistake - its under both org.apache.commons
and
>>>>>> commons-io groupId:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-io/commons-io/
>>>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/commons/commons-io/
>>>>>>
>>>>> <snip/>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, even the pom under org/a/c/c-io has groupId "commons-io", so
>>>>> looks like operator error to me. We may be able to request removal
>>>>> from repo1 if we really want (unclear how much that helps vs. hurts
>>>>> ATM).
>>>> Its still in p.a.o - so we should start with removing it from there,
>>>> perhaps it will then get automatically removed from repo1.maven.org
>>>>
>>>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-ibiblio-rsync-repository/org/apache/commons/
>>>>
>>> <snap/>
>>>
>>> +1, I think the process is to remove from pao (probably in a few days,
>>> to give folks time to voice any objections) and then ping repository@.
>>
>> The repo policy is to never remove anything, unless it's a blatant error
>> and it can be corrected shortly after the release.
>
> Yes it was an error:
> http://markmail.org/message/3hvuuhdz6cnoffl3
> http://markmail.org/message/kqehe2hkqymzscia
>
<snip/>

Thanks for the links.

Towards the repo policy, I quite well appreciate the reasons behind
that. However, I think it makes sense to tease apart what we (Commons)
should do, and what the repo maintainers should do.

As Niall originally suggested, I think we should remove the mentioned
artifacts from pao, if they still exist there. I think we should also
ping repository@, and inform folks there about the bad artifacts
(leaving further action to them as they see fit -- well,
alternatively, we could try to influence such policy, if anyone here
cared sufficiently enough to do so).

-Rahul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message