Hi all,

I also like the idea about deprecating artifacts, or whole directory structure.
A step forward would be to create a maven-dev-approved repositories or
artifacts.
Imagine you are using an outside repository that is really messed up
(or worse - anyone can put anything any time).
What maven the team could do is setup a ground base of rules, so that
if you want your repository to be
maven-dev-compliant you must follow them. Later if you are using
artifacts from repositories that are not
maven-dev-compliant, there could be a message warning you.
To me it doesn't really make sense to create a new repository without
improving the process of using the repositories.
Otherwise, as Brian pointed, we will end up with a new repository,
which has the same data, and no one is using the old repo.

Cheers, Petar.

Because without it doesn't really make
sense creating new repository and

2009/9/25 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>:
> +1 to adding deprecation metadata.
>
> -1 to having a plugin... the deprecation warnings should come from
> maven core itself... ok we can add a plugin for [2.0.x,2.2.1] support
>
> Also if we are adding deprecation metadata, there are a number of
> other little bits of metadata that should be added, e.g. version
> comparison scheme (since OSGI rules are different from Maven 2.x
> rules, we will need a way to flag which rules apply... I see this as
> being a rule applied to a groupId or at best a groupId:artifactId...
> if you want to change your version comparison rule halfway through,
> change the groupId or the artifactId)
>
> -Stephen
>
> 2009/9/25 Anders Kristian Andersen <[email protected]>:
>> I think it is TOTAL important we keep the contract:
>> *** This is a long standing rule that we do not remove or change the
>> contents of central ***
>>
>> Therefore a way out could be to start making deprecated tags in the
>> directories.
>> Then we could come up with a  *** maven-deprected-dependency-plugin *** that
>> could warn users against various bad / deprecated / moved artifacts.
>>
>> Consider a director xxxx with pom.xml and other files.
>>
>> adding a file called deprecated.xml could deprecate the directory / parts of
>> the files etc.
>>
>> then running
>>
>> mvn deprected-dependency:check
>> would list usage
>>
>> This could be combined with options / tools in archiva could help too.
>>
>> best regards
>> Anders Kristian Andersen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 25/09/2009, at 06.11, Brian Fox wrote:
>>
>>> 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]
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>



-- 
Regards, Petar!
Karlovo, Bulgaria.
- - - - - - - -
| Author @ Manning Publications.
| CEO @ Phamola
| BGJUG-Bulgarian Java User Group Leader.
| Apache Maven Developer.
| Apache Jakarta PMC member.
| Jakarta Cactus Lead Developer.
| Codehaus Plexus Developer
| Blogger: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/paranoiabla/
- - - - - - - -
Public PGP Key at:
https://keyserver1.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0x19658550C3110611
Key Fingerprint: A369 A7EE 61BC 93A3 CDFF  55A5 1965 8550 C311 0611

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to