Are you dropping new files into the local repository or integrating
this as part of the metadata? Do these files only work locally?
Also in the case of 2.1 we should also consider just not allowing the
state where there is no POM. Consider the artifact not complete
without a POM.
On 4-Jul-08, at 11:29 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
On 04/07/2008, at 3:40 AM, John Casey wrote:
Not to distract from the higher-level discussion, but I'd like to
get into the nuts and bolts of MARTIFACT-25 a bit...in case someone
beats me to it.
We introduced a properties file that tracks resolution attempts for
artifacts that weren't found on the remote repository, and I'd like
to see if we can reuse that file/concept/code to handle artifacts
that don't have accompanying POMs on the remote repo. It's a
similar concept, so the two should dovetail relatively well, and
require little code to accomplish the fix.
This makes sense to me. So continue to expand on the update check
manager to handle this case?
The other alternative - which at one point we were doing - is to
write out the stub POM into the local repository and retain that. It
would simplify the code, but muddies the local repo content.
I believe these have the same net effect, in that the artifact is
never resolved a second time. Is that correct?
The way I see it, the biggest hurdle for this issue is creating a
[set of] good tests to circumscribe the issue and make sure it
doesn't regress later.
I don't think there's too many variations - the problem is only with
missing POM files, right?
Cheers,
Brett
My $0.02.
-john
Brett Porter wrote:
Hi all,
As I indicated a couple of weeks back, moving towards a 2.1 alpha
release, I was looking at releasing an alpha of maven-artifact.
Brian was able to locate the issue he was referring to a couple of
weeks back about re-resolving (now MARTIFACT-25), so I've postponed.
Once that's fixed, I think there should be no reason not to
proceed with a release based on the thread we had back then.
Are there any other issues that anyone sees as blocking moving
forward with a release?
I've done all the testing I was planning to already. Oleg, did you
want to take this release, or shall I go ahead after that issue is
sorted?
Cheers,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
John Casey
Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.
No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow.
They know it is going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically
dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of
dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or
goals are in doubt.
-- Robert Pirzig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
