This has already been done once in history, between M1 and M2 and look how we still have that mess to deal with all the time. Doing this again serves no one well, making sure new data coming in is clean is more productive for everyone. Who would _want_ to deploy their stuff to the "old" repo? No one. The hurdle to get to the new repo would be the same as putting the checks on the current repo for all new artifacts.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Brett Porter <[email protected]> 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? > > 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] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
