www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <daniel.k...@iona.com>
Subject Re: too many jaxbs out there
Date Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:07:58 GMT
On Friday 21 March 2008, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Daniel Kulp wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> >> I dont know if the license has changed, it didnt allow it when it
> >> was uploaded
> >
> > No, there are a LOT of Sun things (jaxws, jaxb, newer activation,
> > mail, etc...) that are now CDDL and could be put in central.  They
> > currently exist at java.net.   The main problems are:
> > 1) The sun poms suck
>
> I haven't used them myself, but couldn't we help them with this?
> Which ones are in worst shape?

Umm... All of them?   I don't think any of them have any of the extra 
information to make them useful for things like remote-resources.   They 
don't have organization info, they don't have license info,  many don't 
have dependencies when the probably should, many don't even have a 
<name> tag.  

I tried to send them a patch about a year ago to update all the poms that 
CXF used, but they didn't apply it and they've continued to deploy new 
stuff with minimal/crappy poms.

Dan


> > 2) Sun has a tendency to change things after they are released which
> > causes major issues if they were synced to central.  The jaxws-api
> > 2.1-1 jar at central is to deal with them doing that.
> >
> > That said, I'm all for getting the java.net stuff into central, but
> > it would require quite a bit of work from someone to get the poms
> > cleaned up, etc....
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Steve Loughran
> >>>
> >>> <steve.loughran@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>  well, we need to look at them to see how they vary. Also, It
> >>>> still
> >>>>
> >>>  >  breaks transitive classpath inference if there's not
> >>>  >  recognition/warning that you're adding multiple different
> >>>  >  implementations to a classpath.
> >>>
> >>>  Maven doesn't currently understand 'implementations'.  The same
> >>> sort of thing happens with the MyFaces JSF implementation vs. the
> >>> Sun Reference Implementation-- Maven will happily include both in
> >>> a webapp, because the groupId+artifactId differs.
> >>>
> >>>  >  I have one more question. There's no official sun release in
> >>>  > there, just stub poms. Does that still hold?
> >>>
> >>>  My guess is that if the license permitted it, we'd already have
> >>> it in central.  Is this one of the older versions that requires
> >>> clicking on the license?
> >>>
> >>>  --
> >>>  Wendy



-- 
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

Mime
View raw message