Having said that, using a general maven repository store (i.e. where people can publish arbitrary artifacts outside of the helios/indigo releases) has always made sense. I thikn the point of the helios*, indigo* ones were solely as a means of putting release train content in there.
If we decide to ditch that and move to a pair of repositories (e.g. the published and snapshot) then that's fine as well. There wasn't any forced way to set it up like that; I just thought it might be useful.
Alex On Dec 1, 2011, at 16:14, David Carver wrote:
Including the dash-dev on this as well.Al Blue setup the current layout, but I agree that it probably needs to be restructured. Input into making maven.eclipse.org more useful is welcome.I also would have liked to see the Nexus Pro free license accepted that Sonatype had originally offered to the foundation. The staging support is something that is definitely needed.Dave On 11/29/2011 05:12 PM, Jesse McConnell wrote:In my opinion that was largely torpedo'd when the foundation didn't take offer for the professional nexus version that has staging support. For example, there is no way I would take jetty deployments away from the oss.sonatype.org setup and move to maven.eclipse.org, the staging support has uncovered far too many issues on release to leave it and run the risk involved with using the maven.eclipse.org setup as it currently stands. That and there is no sync to central that I know about setup for it.Also the layout of the maven.eclipse.org is confusing at best with its usage of indigo, helios, juno, nightly, integration, milestone, etc etc...dave and I talked through it a number of times and my understanding is something forced him to setup as it is...and its current setup really isn't conducive to contribution. I have the maven signing plugin in there and its a nightmare to figure out where it deploys snapshots and releases to.So in summary I have looked and helped a bit with dash but my understanding is there are too many outside restrictions regarding the layout getting imposed on it from orbit to make it generally useful, much less have it sync to central.I'll catch up with dave on it again and see if anything has changed though.cheers, jesse -- jesse mcconnell jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com 2011/11/29 Wayne Beaton <wa...@eclipse.org> The Dash project is doing some work on a Nexus repository at: maven.eclipse.org Making Orbit bundles available was one of their targets.I'm not sure how far along they are. They would most likely welcome the help in making this real.Wayne On 11/29/2011 04:32 PM, Jesse McConnell wrote:Since we (jetty) have been putting more efforts into getting the jspreference implementation into orbit in a generally usable fashion (itssadly had a few glassfish specific things creep in we have had topatch and take up with them) we have tried to align our usage with thebundles in orbit.however since can't rely on orbit being durable at all, the artifactsinside can change their versions, or the link to the actual orbit repositories change on a whim we long ago stopped trying to consumedirectory out of orbit for our maven builds, opting instead to put thelimited number of objects we require into a special directory on downloads.eclipse.org under out jetty project and reference those directly for building out distributions.....Which leads me to the issue we now face, of getting the jsp bundles weproduced in orbit as a maven dependency for our jetty-maven-pluginwhich is hosted out of our codehaus git repository. It _needs_ be toable to address this jsp bundle with maven coordinates so I am goingto start putting our orbit bundles into maven central for jetty. Thisis a flat out requirement for us now...our prior solution isn't acceptable any longer now that we have our maven plugin needing to reference this bundle. my intent at this point is to stuff our orbit bundles under org.mortbay.jetty.jsp.orbit, or perhapsorg.eclipse.jetty.orbit:artifactId. Ehile it would be nicer if I putthem under org.eclipse.orbit....I suspect there might be some heartburn if I went and tried that :) So, does anyone have any plans they want to share on how they handlethis situation? I know there have been countless discussions on thistopic on countless bugs in bugzilla, I have participated in a few of them...but at this point we just can't wait anymore and are going to put in a patchwork solution for the time being. So its clear, even if orbit were to produce both p2 and maven repositories of their content (which I believe people have said isdoable) we would still require that those maven repositories be syncedto maven central. cheers, jesse -- jesse mcconnell jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ orbit-dev mailing list orbit-...@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev-- Wayne Beaton The Eclipse Foundation Twitter: @waynebeaton <mime-attachment.png> _______________________________________________ orbit-dev mailing list orbit-...@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev _______________________________________________ orbit-dev mailing list orbit-...@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev_______________________________________________ dash-dev mailing list dash-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dash-dev
_______________________________________________ dash-dev mailing list dash-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dash-dev
