geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geir Magnusson Jr <g...@4quarters.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Geronimo PMC Managed, project-specific Maven Repository
Date Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:53:07 GMT

On Apr 4, 2005, at 5:48 PM, David Blevins wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:10:55PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 4, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 4, 2005, at 9:59 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seems like we are going in circles on this one.  Can we reasonable
>>>> agree that it isn't practical to hold up a Geronimo release till
>>>> every project we have a snapshot depenency on is able to hand us 
>>>> some
>>>> sort of official release of their own?
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> We do our best to eliminate the SNAPSHOTs, but the reality is we 
>>> can't
>>> always eliminate all of them.
>>
>> You guys are crazy.  We have to be able to eliminate them, especially
>> for production releases. Even before we're 1.0, I would expect that 
>> our
>> 0.8 and 0.9 stuff are becoming good enough for some dependable use, 
>> and
>> thus we should only depend on released software.
>>
>
> You do realize we are talking about two different things here.  No one 
> in their right mind would propose SNAPSHOT dependencies are a good 
> idea for releases of any kind.  Not only do I strongly agree, I think 
> we shouldn't switch something back to SNAPSHOT after a release.

Sorry - I must have misunderstood the following :

>>
>>> On Apr 4, 2005, at 9:59 AM, David Blevins wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seems like we are going in circles on this one.  Can we reasonable
>>>> agree that it isn't practical to hold up a Geronimo release till
>>>> every project we have a snapshot depenency on is able to hand us 
>>>> some
>>>> sort of official release of their own?


>
> Even further, I don't think pressuring projects into giving us an 
> officially named version of our SNAPSHOT when they aren't ready to 
> release is a solution either.  Then we are just turning a blind eye 
> and saying, "not my problem."

Well, if we are working closely with a project (like OpenEJB, ActiveMQ, 
HOWL, etc) and they do that it's time to reconsider working so closely 
with them, IMO.  I'm not saying that projects should release for us on 
a whim because they are independent and have other parts of their 
community to cater to, and I know things will settle down, but there 
are lots of users that wouldn't take things seriously until the 
pedigree of the OSS we're using is clear, and it wouldn't be if we were 
issuing our own snapshots of external dependencies.

>
> Our current reality is that we do have over a dozen SNAPSHOT 
> dependencies and we will need to release soon enough.
>
> I only see two solutions to this releasing issue:
>
>  1. Use date stamped (cvs) or revision stamped (svn) jars in place of 
> SNAPSHOTs on releases.
>  2. Not release until we can truly eliminate all SNAPSHOT usage--not 
> just get other projects to relabel our SNAPSHOTs so we feel warm and 
> fuzzy.
>
> My long term preference is 2, though I'm ok with 1 in the very short 
> term.

For the very short term I can live with #1, but this should be a 
priority to get under control, somehow.

geir

>
> -David
>
>
>
-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geir@gluecode.com


Mime
View raw message