openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [policy] incubating projects and maven repositories v1.0
Date Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:54:25 GMT
Hi Marc,

That's one of the flux items being discussed. I am not clear when  
this is going to be resolved; hopefully shortly.


On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:

> Craig-
> Does that that we should still deploy the snapshots to the "m2- 
> snapshot-repository" (instead of, e.g., "m2-incubating- 
> repository")? The clause: "The incubating repositories are for  
> releases from projects within the Apache Incubator - incubating  
> snapshots still goto the snapshot repositories." seems to suggest  
> so, but I don't think it is completely clear.
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>> FYI, policy is still a bit in flux...
>> Craig
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> From: Jason van Zyl <>
>>> Date: August 27, 2006 9:44:58 AM PDT
>>> To:
>>> Subject: [policy] incubating projects and maven repositories v1.0
>>> Reply-To:
>>> Hi,
>>> It looks like people objected to creating another mailing list  
>>> for policy so I just used [policy] as Robert did in a previous  
>>> message.
>>> Henri has setup Maven repositories for the incubator and there is  
>>> a document which is an attempt to describe the current setup here:
>>> I think that everyone agrees that a separate repository for  
>>> incubating projects is a good idea as
>>> 1) you can clearly see what incubator artifacts have been created
>>> 2) we can perform analysis and create reports for incubator  
>>> artifacts easily (using Archiva, the maven repository manager)
>>> 3) separating the administration duties of the incubator  
>>> repository is a good idea I think. This might involve a different  
>>> instance of Archiva and/or different people looking after the  
>>> respective repositories
>>> I haven't looked at all the projects using Maven in the incubator  
>>> but cxf, the one I'm most involved with, looks like its settling  
>>> on versions like:
>>> 2.0-incubator-SNAPSHOT
>>> So the repository is clearly separated, and from a dependency  
>>> element in a Maven POM you can clearly see it's an incubator  
>>> version.
>>> There was discussion that incubator repository would not be  
>>> sync'd to the central repository but I don't really see much  
>>> point in this. A few folks with incubating projects have voiced  
>>> concerns that they don't want to see their projects be taken out  
>>> of circulation in the central repository because they are  
>>> incubating. If each and every incubating project has a version  
>>> for each artifact like that above then it will be fairly clear  
>>> that it's from the incubator. Moreso then if you just had a  
>>> repository definition pointing at the incubator repository.
>>> Also someone may make an repository request to place an incubator  
>>> artifact in the central repository and at this point a policy  
>>> mandated here would conflict with someone's right to redistribute  
>>> artifacts created in the incubator. I don't really want to get  
>>> into the business of policing repository requests. I think it is  
>>> in the best interests of the  incubating projects to have the  
>>> incubator repository sync'd to Maven's central repository. The  
>>> source of artifacts for incubating projects is clear from the  
>>> version so I don't think there will be any confusion by consumers  
>>> of these artifacts and as such I don't really see any downside to  
>>> allowing the sync to Maven's central repository.
>>> Thoughts?
>>> Jason van Zyl
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System 
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
408 276-5638
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message