http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg102285.html
According to current policies, fixing corruptions on Central is not an option.
Change policies is not an option. (Change-able policy is not a policy).
Option1: Hide the corruption (through added metadata)
Option2: Build a new Central which is clean

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Stephen Connolly
<[email protected]> wrote:
> if we have a second repo at all that means that anyone not using a
> repository manager will hit both repos for every artifact (which is bad)
>
> IMHO, central is what it is, all we can do is add metadata to help paint
> over the crayon scribbles on the wall from when the children were growing up
> ;-)
>
> -Stephen
>
> Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
>
> On 1 Oct 2009, at 18:39, Paul Gier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What about creating a new legacy repository for deprecated artifacts?
>>  Stuff that we don't want in the main repository could be moved to a new
>> legacy repo. This way we effectively deprecate these artifacts, but it does
>> not require any POM or metadata changes.  Anyone that needs to use the
>> deprecated artifacts, could then just add the legacy repo to their repo
>> manager or a profile in settings.xml.
>>
>> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2009-09-25, at 5:13 AM, Petar Tahchiev wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Exactly, this is all part of providing better information over time.
>>> There is no big bang cleanup that makes it all better. That is just a pipe
>>> dream. We just have to incrementally and diligently clean up what we have.
>>> Maven Central is a great resource and it needs some TLC but not cleansing.
>>>>
>>>> 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]
>>>>
>>> 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]
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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]

Reply via email to