To say it's the existing implementation doesn't really capture the
situation accurately, IMO. Jackrabbit is only the existing
implementation since the beta-4 release, and has only be included in the
first milestone of 2.1.0 of Maven. I'm not sure where else it's included
- say, Archiva, or wherever - but including the Mercury wagon in Maven
2.1.0 doesn't preclude the continued development of the jackrabbit
wagon, if others are more interested in that. But, we might look at the
two implementations as being on equal footing, and therefore we have an
open decision before us as to which one to use in Maven.
Ralph Goers wrote:
Oh. I saw that. I guess I read more into it. I had this crazy idea that
someone was thinking of using jackrabbit as their Maven repository.
Actually, making Jackrabbit into a repository isn't a bad idea at all.
In any case, it seems what you are saying is that there is simply a
choice in whether to fix the existing implementation vs switching to
mercury.
Ralph
John Casey wrote:
http://www.nabble.com/WebDAV-deploying-bug-with-Maven-2.1.0-M1-to19673500.html
Admittedly, not a real healthy discussion, but IMO it might be
worthwhile to discuss. The jackrabbit implementation is new as of
1.0-beta-3 (really beta-4, since beta-3 is badly broken), and mercury
has been under a LOT of development lately, and I know folks are
putting quite a bit of effort into testing and documenting it...so it
seems like it might be a better way to go.
We have to fix MDEPLOY-85, and that means at a minimum a new release
of wagon-webdav-jackrabbit...at that point, we have an opportunity to
make a decision about which webdav to use.
BTW, we should also talk about a "pointer" wagon-webdav project that
could simply house a relocation section that points to the current
preferred wagon webDAV impl artifactId. This is a bit of a problem in
beta-4, according to some people I've talked to, since the old
wagon-webdav is no longer available.
-j
---
John Casey
Developer and PMC Member, Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp
Ralph Goers wrote:
I don't recall seeing a discussion on jackrabbit vs mercury. Do you
have a link?
John Casey wrote:
I'm stuck in assembly-plugin mode for the moment, but if you want to
move forward with it, go ahead. FWIW, we also need to put the 2.1
release plan to a vote, particularly given the little bit of
discussion we've had over jackrabbit vs. mercury.
...all things I haven't had time to clear off my to-do list for the
last week or two.
-john
---
John Casey
Developer and PMC Member, Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/buildchimp
Brett Porter wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone opposed to moving forward with a (likely much shorter)
2.0.10 release cycle with what is already on the branch now?
Was anyone already planning to do this?
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
