On Sep 20, 2010, at 3:36 PM, Robert Muir wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: > > Not following. Joe Schmoe w/ project X doesn't have the right to go publish > artifacts at org.apache.lucene.XXX in the iBiblio repository. And, in many > cases, we may not have the right to publish others, but for Apache projects, > we can. Otherwise, in the past, I've often asked the dependency authors to > produce them. Most people will if it means they are getting a wider > distribution. In practice, it rarely is an issue. > > > right but why cant joe shmoe make joe.schmoe.luceneMaven.XXX in the iBiblio > repository? > > At the end of the day, I'm trying to figure out if we can push maven > "downstream" as others have suggested, and it sounds like we can. >
Why don't we just leave this as this: Those of us who want Maven supported as part of the release need to get our stuff together by the next release or else it will be dropped. That means making sure the artifacts are correct and easily testable/reproducible. If we can't do that, then I agree, it should be a downstream effort, at least until we all realize how many people actually use it and then we revisit it at the next release. -Grant
