given these premises
- pom is not in the repo
- project is not willing to put it
then authoritative data can come from project users, after all this is
a community.
As i said before my opinion is that we can still put poms in projects
that didnt have them
On Jan 28, 2008 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Heh, so you are willing to trade "build reproducibility" (for all
> projects linked to central repo) for "care about the community"? o.O
>
> Hrm, please put that on a vote before you do it!
>
> IF you are talking about putting up "dummy" (depsless, only GAV) POMs:
> IMHO, by putting "dummy" poms (without dependency to not screw
> existing builds), only ones with GAV, you do not provide any value to
> community: OSS projects usually move fast, and will quickly switch to
> newer (hopefully fixed) artifacts from central with correct POMs. And
> the companies will... heh, they will use some "advanced repo manager"
> to solve it ;D
>
> IF not, how would you be able to get authoritative data to fill in the
> missing POMs?
>
> Thanks,
> ~t~
>
> On Jan 28, 2008 7:51 PM, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > if there's no pom uploaded then you can take 5 minutes of your time
> > and provide one. I try to do it for all the ones I use. It can be
> > because you care about the community or because you are selfish and
> > want your project to be reproducible ;) either way providing a pom
> > doesnt take that long
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
