On 2009-09-24, at 8:37 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
Moving over to dev...
So here's a thought - why don't we create a "new" central repository?
- a new repository with strict acceptance rules regarding POMs,
signatures, ownership, etc.
- if there's a new metadata format needed (recently discussed), this
would use it
- validated artifacts could be moved over and requests to the old
rewritten (in the same way we maintained the maven1 repo)
- default Maven can ship with both repositories enabled, but a "best
practice" would be to turn old central off (or better, use a
repository manager that doesn't access it / only access it for
acceptable artifacts)
The main issue is finding a way to overcome confusion when an
artifact is changed - you want "old" builds to keep using the same
one it always did, but new builds to use the new one (and cope with
potential revision of metadata without breaking builds). This is the
sort of thing that could be built into Maven in a new version and
the new repo format only accessible from that version.
Thoughts?
What's matters is improvement of the process going forward. As people
move forward with improved submissions from projects then the older
submissions of dubious quality will naturally fall out of use.
Improving the process and helping projects do the right thing is
necessary. Creating another repository isn't really going change the
reality that people are going to use a mixture of old and new
submissions over a long period of time. You can't just up and change
the old content because people depend on it, and you can't just make a
rift between the old and new.
In much the same way we just have to deal with the shit that exists in
Maven 2.x and make it work in Maven 3.x we have to deal with the shit
in the repository and make it work with newer submissions that we
consciously try to improve.
Cheers,
Brett
On 25/09/2009, at 12:52 PM, Albert Kurucz wrote:
Jason and Brian, thanks for the explanations.
Understood, the policy of not removing anything from Maven Central
serves a purpose.
I wish there would be another publicly Maven repository, which is
maintained with rules enforced. This repo could even have a rule
(additional to the old and unenforced rules) that only Maven built
projects can enter, maybe even more restriction: only the designated
Continuous Integration server can upload to it.
This pure Maven repo would not be able to compete with Maven Central
regarding size or the number of artifacts, but some OSS developers
might prefer to use from and supply to this one instead of the big
and
ugly.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Brian Fox <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Albert Kurucz <[email protected]
> wrote:
Requirements for the POMs are defined as:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html
I call the artifact corrupt (regarding Maven Central Compliance) if
the POM of the artifact does not fulfills the above requirements.
There are corrupt ones have made it to the Central, because the
guard
was sleeping.
Correct, but changing them is not an option because it will
destabilize builds. This is a long standing rule that we do not
remove
or change the contents of central.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
