incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Dusbabek <>
Subject Re: Thoughts on issue 697 (Mitigate unpublished dependencies when using Cassandra with Maven)
Date Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:21:28 GMT

There is no way to sugar coat this, so I'll just say it:  I'm a mvn
hater, so I have to disagree with you.  The basis of my hatred is that
I've used mvn before (as part of my job) and found it extremely
encumbering as a developer.

I will try to put my prejudices aside as I make a few points though.

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 19:42, Hannes Schmidt <> wrote:
> In a nutshell, I disagree with the decision to resolve
> as Won't Fix. Here's why:
> One of the central motivations behind Maven was to once and for all get rid
> of binary dependencies in source repositories. You, the Cassandra committers
> operating under the Apache umbrella should have no difficulty getting those
> lib/*.jar dependencies into the official repository. It shouldn't take more
> than half an hour to "mvn deploy" a handful of jars. On that note, it should
> be a no-brainer to actually deploy the *Apache* Cassandra JAR to the
> *Apache* Maven repository.

Cassandra is a community of volunteers.  If someone is willing to take
that half-hour and make Cassandra a mvn-friendly place and maintain it
whilst moving forward, I say let it happen.  Make it easy for us to
package a release and push it to a repo.

Nobody has stepped up to do this though.  We had a pom in trunk for
quite a while.  None of the developers used it, and therefore had no
motivation to maintain it.

> Sorry for the rant but taking shortcuts like this forces every Maven user
> down the stream to either do the work for you, e.g to deploy the Cassandra
> JAR and its dependencies to their local repository or take the very same
> shortcut.

I disagree that every project should do things the mvn way for the
sake of making things easier for mvn users.

>The Hector client, for example, has a dependency on the Thrift and
> Cassandra JARs and it takes the shortcut of having both JARs in the
> repository.

Because packaging dependencies and bundling a project is work.  I
can't speak for rantav, but I think he's being pragmatic and not just
taking a shortcut.

> If I want to use the client in my own Maven-built project, I
> can't do so without manually deploying those two JARs along with the Hector
> JAR to my local repository.

I've been there, and I feel your pain.  Pushing three jars to your
local repo isn't a big deal though.  If you're working on a team,
deploying three more jars on your nexus repo isn't too hard either.


> To add fuel to the fire, I don't think that there is a real need for
> two coexisting build systems for Cassandra (I'm speaking of Ant/Ivy and
> Maven) but even if you decide to go with Ant/Ivy, the resulting artifacts
> should all be accessible in a public Maven repository. This is pretty much a
> convention for any OS project of Cassandra's reach and maturity.
> -- Hannes

View raw message