Le mardi 23 août 2016 23:25:30 Christian Schulte a écrit : > Am 08/23/16 um 23:17 schrieb Paul Benedict: > > Truthfully, I must say a lot of this conversation sounds much like > > Subversion's client/server architecture: > > > > *) The server has a Repository Format version = "build POM" > > *) The clients create a Working Copy version on checkout = "consumer POM" > > *) Two distinct schema series > > *) A client that understands the Repository Format version converts it > > locally to a Working Copy > > *) A client that cannot understand a future Repository Format version > > cannot convert it to a Working Copy > > *) An upgraded client can "upgrade" an older Working Copy version to the > > latest Working Copy version > > > > Is this the way Maven wants to go? 1. in short, no 2. this is not yet "the way Maven wants to go" but the result of discussions and thought on the topic of giving back to Maven an option to be able to have evolution in its build format (which is currently stuck by the fact that central has to be usable from any Maven version and any other tool)
> > I cannot speak for the PMC or explain the way Maven wants to go. When > the above comes to Maven, things are really much more simple. You never > 'check out' the sources from a repository. The repository is only there > to serve artifacts to be consumed by projects. You checkout the sources > (containing everything needed to produce the binary artifacts to deploy) > from the SCM, not the repository. There is no need to deploy any kind of > build information to a repository. That's my understanding so far. that' a way to explain it a complementary explanation: Maven is the only tool which publish its detailed build information to central. Other build tools have their build descriptor, and generate a little "Maven" pom when they want to publish their artifact to central. I tell "Maven" pom, since this little pom is not intended to build the artifact, but only to consume. Then the general idea is to do the same for Maven: treat our build pom as an internal build detail, that stays generally in scm but doesn't go to central. And publish to central only a little generated consumer pom. Parent pom would be the only exception, where the build parent pom would be published to central, but hey, did you see anybody not using Maven publish a parent pom? > I may > be wrong here. You could use Maven to do that checkout based on SCM > information from the repository, of course. I think this is what has > been discussed in that hangout you can still watch on youtube or > somewhere else. Maybe someone post the links to that hangout? there is no Hangout or anything: this is a long discussion, partly on this mailing list, partly on Hangouts, partly in conferences (ApacheCON, FOSDEM, ...) to think think think on general strategies And nowadays, this long running thinking starts to give a result that seems simple, consistent, explanable: that's the right time to try to share with more people and see if it is understandable and has no major issue, before eventually trying a POC or thiinking to decide this is the solution we all really want to implement I intended to start this discussion once Aether import was over, just to avoid starting to much fires in parallel, but it started faster than expected :) Regards, Hervé > > Regards, --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
