[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-288?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12731014#action_12731014
 ] 

Assaf Arkin commented on BUILDR-288:
------------------------------------

"As far as damage control when this causes something to go wrong, I users would 
probably be OK with figuring out what went wrong."

How would you figure out what went wrong?

If you let Buildr generate the buildfile, it adds a default repository to the 
file (except it points to ibiblio, should this be fixed?) and you get default 
behavior that's obvious.

But if this change happens in memory, it's the first repository Buildr looks 
at, and there's nothing indicating that -- how would you go about figuring it?  
Let's say I have a clone of the Maven repo on my network with faster access.  I 
put it first on the list.  Except Buildr goes and chekcs with maven.org first 
because of this feature I'm unaware of.  Sometimes I can't tell the difference. 
 Sometimes it's dog slow -- is it Buildr acting up?  my clone of Maven repo 
just not that good?

a)  How do we make this behavior visible?
b)  How do we roll this change out?

Remember that if this feature is on by default, it's effectively changing how 
existing buidlfiles behaves.  It's the equivalent of changing API behavior.


> Add Canonical Maven2 Repository by Default
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BUILDR-288
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-288
>             Project: Buildr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Dependency management
>            Reporter: Daniel Spiewak
>             Fix For: 1.3.5
>
>
> Almost every buildfile I have ever created starts with the following line:
> repositories.remote << 'http://repo1.maven.org/maven2'
> We already add the scala-tools.org repository to the list when 'buildr/scala' 
> is required, so why not the official, canonical repository at maven.org?  I 
> think that new users especially would find this more intuitive.  There is no 
> real loss of flexibility since it is always possible to *remove* a repository 
> from the array if it becomes necessary.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to