Done. I've filed
http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/issues/detail?id=1938
for Caja and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1982
for Shindig.

hth,
- martin


On 12 Sep 2014, Stanton Sievers wrote:

> Filing two tickets would be fine.  We can point the Shindig ticket to the
> Caja ticket and fix the former when the latter is resolved.
> 
> Thanks!
> On Sep 12, 2014 7:52 AM, "Martin Hoeller" <mar...@xss.co.at> wrote:
> 
> > On 12 Sep 2014, Stanton Sievers wrote:
> >
> > > I understand what you're saying but I don't think that will resolve.
> > I've
> > > tested updating the groupId in Shindig and the caja resources will not
> > > resolve from the google-caja.googlecode repository.  As you stated
> > earlier,
> > > the path to the resource in that repository is at caja/caja and not
> > > com/google/caja/caja.
> > >
> > > When Maven tries to download a resource with groupId com.google.caja, it
> > > fails against all repositories that are defined.
> > >
> > > Downloading:
> > >
> > http://google-caja.googlecode.com/svn/maven/com/google/caja/htmlparser/r4209/htmlparser-r4209.jar
> > > Downloading:
> > >
> > http://google-caja.googlecode.com/svn/maven/com/google/caja/caja/r5054/caja-r5054.jar
> > >
> > > It doesn't matter what the groupId of the actual resource pom says;
> > rather,
> > > the path is what matters.
> >
> > Oh, this is bad. I thought maven would request an artifact with given
> > coordinates from the repo and not a specific file :(
> >
> > So the caja reposiroty/POM coordinates do not match (as stated earlier)
> > and no artifact with the new coordinates from the POM is served by any
> > repository.
> >
> > To solve this issue (as suggested in my orginal mail), we would first
> > need some repository that serves caja with the correct groupId. But this
> > is currently not available and caja seems not to use or support maven
> > very well.
> >
> > Should I still file an issue (that won't be fixed now) to track this?
> > I could also file an issue against caja to fix this maven-issues.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > - martin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to