incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: maven repository
Date Fri, 30 May 2008 12:56:12 GMT
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
>> I really do not know why we have to revisit this same topic year after year
>> after year.

it has now been clearly established that we need to move the
repository. we're now just asking: where?

> Because it's an arbitrary restriction that IMHO hasn't been properly justified.

i'm not sure i'd put it so categorically

we can choose to ask incubating projects to publish their jars to a
separate repository but this is irrelevant for most users. maven
automatically downloads their releases from central repositories
hosted offshore. jar upload to these repositories is beyond the direct
control of apache or incubating projects.

asking podlings to use a separate repository is not going to be
effective for any well used product. for any product which isn't yet
well used, it creates a barrier to adoption.

>> We do not want people to be using any Incubator artifact without explicit
>> knowledge and action, so we do not want them polluting the standard repository.
>
> Replace "artifact" with "release" and "standard repository" with "the
> Internet" and you have a rationale for preventing incubating releases.
> I wouldn't agree with that, but at least that would be a clear and
> consistent argument.
>
> One of the key principles of open source is that you don't put
> arbitrary restrictions on where or how the code is distributed or
> used. Once we approve a release it should be up to the project to
> decide how they want to make it available to their users.

once an artifact has been released, we lose control over the
distribution. asking podlings to publish through a secondary
repository is both annoying and ineffective at making it explicit to
people that they are using artifacts under incubation. this measure
cuts against the grain of maven.

in terms of communication, the pom is the place to focus. AIUI maven
users choose to use a library by adding a dependency with artifact and
group IDs. an easy and effective way to ensure that users know that
they are using an artifact from the incubator would be to ensure that
the group or artifact ID includes this information. we could also ask
that the pom (meta-data) for the project specifies 'Apache Software
Foundation (Incubator)' rather than 'Apache Software Foundation' as
the organisation.

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message